City to be part of £9bn railway upgrades (From Daily Echo)

derek james says...
11:06am Mon 16 Jul 12

all very well but i can see an already overpriced railway system getting even more expensive, even with fuel prices the way they are now it's often cheaper for businisess to travel by car

Report this post »

Over the Edge says...
11:07am Mon 16 Jul 12

This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.

Report this post »

chunky_lover says...
11:16am Mon 16 Jul 12

Title says "to be part", Body says "could be" - so which is it?

Since, pretty much anything "could be" - let's just make up stuff shall we?

Report this post »

Totton Ric says...
11:18am Mon 16 Jul 12

New's Flash,Who's not done there home work then Echo !Electrification came to Southampton/Bournemo
uth in 1967 & on to Weymouth in 1988 !

Report this post »

Shoong says...
11:29am Mon 16 Jul 12

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.

I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.

Report this post »

X Old Bill says...
12:09pm Mon 16 Jul 12

So does that mean that the line from Basingstoke to Southampton might have BOTH 3rd rail and overhead wires?

That would draw 'anoraks' from all over the world!

Report this post »

Boatman says...
12:14pm Mon 16 Jul 12

X Old Bill wrote:
So does that mean that the line from Basingstoke to Southampton might have BOTH 3rd rail and overhead wires?

That would draw 'anoraks' from all over the world!

Totally inconceivable!

Report this post »

Condor Man says...
12:15pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Until it's cheaper to take a family on the train than it is to go by car people will only use the network for commuting. 2 adult and a child to London was over £80 by train, less than half if you drove and came in from the suburbs.

Report this post »

Zeo says...
12:57pm Mon 16 Jul 12

If they 'did' offer a passenger service from Southampton to Bedford, I can kick my other half on a train and she can see her parents, and it's half the cost of driving is well... it's a Win-Win if it happens!

Report this post »

Totton Ric says...
1:04pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Condor Man wrote:
Until it's cheaper to take a family on the train than it is to go by car people will only use the network for commuting. 2 adult and a child to London was over £80 by train, less than half if you drove and came in from the suburbs.

Agree but we have a Family Rail Card,Super off peak is £60 from Totton to Waterloo (2 adults 2 kids),even better if there's 4 adults as you can get group save 4 where you only get charged for 2 adults @ £71 & kids go for a quid each !

Report this post »

Condor Man says...
1:41pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Totton Ric wrote:

Condor Man wrote:
Until it's cheaper to take a family on the train than it is to go by car people will only use the network for commuting. 2 adult and a child to London was over £80 by train, less than half if you drove and came in from the suburbs.
Agree but we have a Family Rail Card,Super off peak is £60 from Totton to Waterloo (2 adults 2 kids),even better if there's 4 adults as you can get group save 4 where you only get charged for 2 adults @ £71 & kids go for a quid each !

Ric, for about £25 in petrol and £15 for the travel cards we are still making a saving going by car. The cheapest way to London is by coach but that would still be more for more than one person.

Report this post »

Over the Edge says...
1:56pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.

Yes in fact I am pleased with the situation as it stands, as a frequent traveller to London I find the current service very good it is however a bit overpriced but I book well in advanced to get bigger discounts.

Report this post »

Over the Edge says...
1:58pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.

Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
2:04pm Mon 16 Jul 12

As long as they stick a rolling sorting office in the middle of trains that pick up mail and parcels from the stops the trains make to make the postal service faster then I don't care since I rarely use the train to go anywhere, i mean it's like £20 return to portsmouth from southampton by train but it's less than £10 by bus and then the hovercraft service from southsea is cheaper than our red funnel ferries.

Report this post »

cantthinkofone says...
2:15pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Railways are so last century. It's all about the cable cars now.

Report this post »

Shoong says...
2:22pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders

9 Billion.

Yes, I'm sure it's just jangling around in the change purse! ;)

Report this post »

dopplershift says...
2:37pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Southampton to Woking is around £25 return on the train. I did it with a friend the other day as we thought it would be easier to use the train. We were right it was easy but it cost us £50. Then last weekend we did it by car and it took the same time and just over £10 in diesel. You can almost drive and get a hotel for the night for the same cost to put perspective on it.

Report this post »

Inform Al says...
2:57pm Mon 16 Jul 12

I'm currently in Kent having got here by car at a fraction of the cost I would have incurred if I was stupid enough to consider making the journey by train, and at travel time of 90 minutes far quicker.. When I travel to London I usually go by coach, even cheaper than the car and quite speedy. Financially the trains are history until we get a government brave enough to re-nationalise the whole shebang.

Report this post »

Torchie1 says...
3:28pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders

If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.

Report this post »

Shoong says...
3:36pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.

Yes, it's called economics, but if you're looking for a great understanding of it here then you won't get far..!

Report this post »

loosehead says...
4:31pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Totton Ric wrote:
New's Flash,Who's not done there home work then Echo !Electrification came to Southampton/Bournemo

uth in 1967 & on to Weymouth in 1988 !

They're saying it's not going to be the track type but overhead cables powering the trains & all electric trains will have to be modified

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
4:51pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.

Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?

Report this post »

Inform Al says...
5:07pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?

Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.

Report this post »

Torchie1 says...
5:10pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?

Is that Road Tax or Road Tacks?

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
5:40pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.

Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.

[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.[/p][/quote]Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted. Ginger_cyclist

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
5:44pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Torchie1 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Is that Road Tax or Road Tacks?

Road TAX was abolished in 1937, not road tacks... though I should buy some road TACKS and use them on knob jockey motorists.

Report this post »

Inform Al says...
6:08pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.
Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.

That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?

[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.[/p][/quote]Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.[/p][/quote]That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue? Inform Al

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
6:24pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.
Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.
That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?

No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.

[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.[/p][/quote]Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.[/p][/quote]That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?[/p][/quote]No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me. Ginger_cyclist

Report this post »

Torchie1 says...
6:43pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Is that Road Tax or Road Tacks?
Road TAX was abolished in 1937, not road tacks... though I should buy some road TACKS and use them on knob jockey motorists.

Clearly not seeing the humorous reference to Bradley Wiggins in his bicycle race. Why do cyclists go off on one as soon as they sense a challenge to their chosen way of transport? Is it the exhaust fumes that you chose to inhale as you glide serenely through the roads of Southampton on your way to hug a tree?

[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Is that Road Tax or Road Tacks?[/p][/quote]Road TAX was abolished in 1937, not road tacks... though I should buy some road TACKS and use them on knob jockey motorists.[/p][/quote]Clearly not seeing the humorous reference to Bradley Wiggins in his bicycle race. Why do cyclists go off on one as soon as they sense a challenge to their chosen way of transport? Is it the exhaust fumes that you chose to inhale as you glide serenely through the roads of Southampton on your way to hug a tree? Torchie1

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
7:13pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Torchie1 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Is that Road Tax or Road Tacks?
Road TAX was abolished in 1937, not road tacks... though I should buy some road TACKS and use them on knob jockey motorists.
Clearly not seeing the humorous reference to Bradley Wiggins in his bicycle race. Why do cyclists go off on one as soon as they sense a challenge to their chosen way of transport? Is it the exhaust fumes that you chose to inhale as you glide serenely through the roads of Southampton on your way to hug a tree?

No, it's because there are many people who drive that are out to get cyclists just because they're there.

[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Is that Road Tax or Road Tacks?[/p][/quote]Road TAX was abolished in 1937, not road tacks... though I should buy some road TACKS and use them on knob jockey motorists.[/p][/quote]Clearly not seeing the humorous reference to Bradley Wiggins in his bicycle race. Why do cyclists go off on one as soon as they sense a challenge to their chosen way of transport? Is it the exhaust fumes that you chose to inhale as you glide serenely through the roads of Southampton on your way to hug a tree?[/p][/quote]No, it's because there are many people who drive that are out to get cyclists just because they're there. Ginger_cyclist

Report this post »

solomum says...
7:15pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Condor Man wrote:
Until it's cheaper to take a family on the train than it is to go by car people will only use the network for commuting. 2 adult and a child to London was over £80 by train, less than half if you drove and came in from the suburbs.

Try trainline.com. We regularly go to Devon for less than £16 return for the whole family using a friends and family railcard. Even tickets purchased from national rail are a lot cheaper with a railcard. Megatrain also do £1 each way tickets to London.

Report this post »

S Pance says...
8:02pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Great move and much overdue!

By electrifying the line it will mean cheaper, faster more efficient trains.

Report this post »

Fatty x Ford Worker says...
8:17pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ah so thats why they made the bridges higher then!

Report this post »

Velleity says...
8:18pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.
Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.
That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?
No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.

Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly.

Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist.

[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.[/p][/quote]Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.[/p][/quote]That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?[/p][/quote]No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.[/p][/quote]Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly. Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist. Velleity

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
8:34pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Velleity wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.
Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.
That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?
No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.
Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly.

Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist.

Then you'd be done for murder and yes I have a sense of humor but killing people or hurting them for any reason is no laughing matter.

[quote][p][bold]Velleity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.[/p][/quote]Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.[/p][/quote]That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?[/p][/quote]No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.[/p][/quote]Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly. Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Then you'd be done for murder and yes I have a sense of humor but killing people or hurting them for any reason is no laughing matter. Ginger_cyclist

Report this post »

ChandlersFordKev says...
10:18pm Mon 16 Jul 12

solomum says...
7:15pm Mon 16 Jul 12
Try trainline.com. We regularly go to Devon for less than £16 return for the whole family using a friends and family railcard. Even tickets purchased from national rail are a lot cheaper with a railcard. Megatrain also do £1 each way tickets to London.”

Sorry quote seems to not to be working.

Quite agree with you Berwick-Upon-Tweed, single on Thursday to Southampton £45!!!!

Report this post »

ChandlersFordKev says...
10:20pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Should have said via London as well, so not the long route.

Report this post »

IronLady2010 says...
10:32pm Mon 16 Jul 12

As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.

Report this post »

Velleity says...
10:59pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Velleity wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.
Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.
That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?
No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.
Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly.

Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist.
Then you'd be done for murder and yes I have a sense of humor but killing people or hurting them for any reason is no laughing matter.

QED

[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Velleity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.[/p][/quote]Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.[/p][/quote]That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?[/p][/quote]No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.[/p][/quote]Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly. Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Then you'd be done for murder and yes I have a sense of humor but killing people or hurting them for any reason is no laughing matter.[/p][/quote]QED Velleity

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
11:14pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Velleity wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Velleity wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Inform Al wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

Torchie1 wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.
I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then?

Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.
Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements?

Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders
If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.
Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?
Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.
Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.
That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?
No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.
Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly.

Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist.
Then you'd be done for murder and yes I have a sense of humor but killing people or hurting them for any reason is no laughing matter.
QED

What? "QED"? What the hell does that mean?

[quote][p][bold]Velleity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Velleity[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Over the Edge[/bold] wrote: This is all good, however the train travel prices will increase to pay for it, we are all in this together.[/p][/quote]I'm going to assume you are happy with the current situation then? Probably not, if we want an improved system we're going to have to chip in.[/p][/quote]Why should passengers pay increased prices, why don't the rail operators pay for the improvements? Maybe the answer is less of a pay out to shareholders[/p][/quote]If you reduced the payout (Dividends) to Shareholders, would it be a total surprise if they opted to invest their money in an enterprise that gave a better return? The money for the investment would have to still be found and the commuters using the service would be the obvious source. I thought it was only cyclists that couldn't understand the concept of paying for what they willingly use.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay for the roads, it's called general taxation, road tax was gotten rid of in 1937 by Churchill, motorists pay a tax on pollution they cause called Vehicle Excise Duty, it's not based on how much they use the road, that's why electric cars and most hybrids don't pay it along with cyclists and very little to none of the V.E.D money goes towards road upkeep, you going to go round trying to kill cyclists and electric/hybrid car drivers now just because they don't pay for your emissions?[/p][/quote]Trying to mow down the 'orrible non tax paying cyclist these days has got very tricky. The Old Bill get a bit shirty when I drive my car onto the pavement to get them. They're too rare on the roads to waste petrol looking for them.[/p][/quote]Like I said, cyclists do pay tax, even the ones who are out of work or made redundant, even if it is just the tax we pay on everything you can buy and you just don't want to chase cyclists down the bus lane because your precious little cage on wheels needs £5 of petrol just to go a mile, I bet you or another cager here who thinks road tax still exists is the **** who told me to get off the road down Northam on Saturday, even though i was in the lane I needed which was the one to go straight and into the bus lane, the **** mentioned didn't even get 50 yards on me before I caught up and passed them and before you mention insurance, no I don't have any yet that covers my bike for damage but I am covered for any claim against me worth well in excess of £1,000,000 also with that liability insurance I also get free legal help so if you or anyone else knocks me down and I'm not at fault then you WILL be prosecuted.[/p][/quote]That brings up an interesting point, if I knock you down I'm sure someone will take my registration plate details. When some plank on a bike mows me down on the pavement, how will I know who to sue?[/p][/quote]No idea but I do know one person it won't be and that's me, I don't even ride on shared use paths because most are just not wide enough for pedestrians to share with cyclists, especially when a trio of mums with pushchairs walk along it almost side by side to chat but I will use them if I think it's safer to do so, like while I was riding my backup bike which was a bmx or to save time since i have a shared use at the end of my road that leads out onto the main road, though it's completely useless since at the end where the main road is, you have to get off to wheel it at least a foot to the road but if I did ever hit a pedestrian and it was my fault, I would admit it, apologize, ask if they're okay, if they're not then I'd give them first aid, if they're badly hurt (which would be possible but not likely) then I would phone for an ambulance and hope to hell that my regret and acknowledgement of it being my fault would be enough that they didn't sue me.[/p][/quote]Whereas, if I hit you, I'll be sure to reverse over you to make sure the job's done properly. Do you have a sense of humour? Oh, of course not, you're a cyclist.[/p][/quote]Then you'd be done for murder and yes I have a sense of humor but killing people or hurting them for any reason is no laughing matter.[/p][/quote]QED[/p][/quote]What? "QED"? What the hell does that mean? Ginger_cyclist

Report this post »

IronLady2010 says...
11:15pm Mon 16 Jul 12

"US security agents are to be based at Heathrow and some other UK airports for the duration of the ‪Olympic‬ Games, according to Sky sources."

Is this part of the upgrades to Rail services too? We'll have Yanks checking our rail tickets next!

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
11:16pm Mon 16 Jul 12

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.

It's worse when they're drunk too.

Report this post »

IronLady2010 says...
11:19pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.

Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
11:28pm Mon 16 Jul 12

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?

It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.

Report this post »

OSPREYSAINT says...
11:48pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Fatty x Ford Worker wrote:
Ah so thats why they made the bridges higher then!

No that was done so that they could get larger containers of Ford parts on to the wagons.

Report this post »

OSPREYSAINT says...
11:49pm Mon 16 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?
It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.

... and that was only the crew?

Report this post »

OSPREYSAINT says...
11:51pm Mon 16 Jul 12

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.

Pubic hair?

Report this post »

OSPREYSAINT says...
11:55pm Mon 16 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
Pubic hair?

Sorry I was getting confused here, was it people doing handstands and rubbing their heads on the seat, and I assume you meant you wouldn't sit on the seats rather than on the hairy people?

Report this post »

Inform Al says...
12:22am Tue 17 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
Pubic hair?
Sorry I was getting confused here, was it people doing handstands and rubbing their heads on the seat, and I assume you meant you wouldn't sit on the seats rather than on the hairy people?

Think I'll go to bed now, this thread is getting too hairy for me!

Report this post »

Beer Monster says...
10:32am Tue 17 Jul 12

ChandlersFordKev wrote:
solomum says...
7:15pm Mon 16 Jul 12
Try trainline.com. We regularly go to Devon for less than £16 return for the whole family using a friends and family railcard. Even tickets purchased from national rail are a lot cheaper with a railcard. Megatrain also do £1 each way tickets to London.”

Sorry quote seems to not to be working.

Quite agree with you Berwick-Upon-Tweed, single on Thursday to Southampton £45!!!!

Precisely, I book up my travel from Edinburgh to London well in advance (usually around £30-£40 each way) and supplement the journey with the Megatrain tickets when they become avaliable.

Unfortunately it seems that Megatrain won't be available during the Olympics, so I'll be paying full whack :-(

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
12:46pm Tue 17 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?
It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.
... and that was only the crew?

No, passengers, normally football fans, they weren't aggressive or anything, it was just the smell of cheap booze and body odor mixed together along with them dripping sweat.

Report this post »

Shoong says...
1:30pm Tue 17 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?
It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.
... and that was only the crew?
No, passengers, normally football fans, they weren't aggressive or anything, it was just the smell of cheap booze and body odor mixed together along with them dripping sweat.

Hypocrite & closet bigot then.

Report this post »

OSPREYSAINT says...
3:49pm Tue 17 Jul 12

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?
It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.
... and that was only the crew?
No, passengers, normally football fans, they weren't aggressive or anything, it was just the smell of cheap booze and body odor mixed together along with them dripping sweat.

They probably didn't like your After shave but I bet they didn't complain!

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
1:13pm Mon 23 Jul 12

Shoong wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?
It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.
... and that was only the crew?
No, passengers, normally football fans, they weren't aggressive or anything, it was just the smell of cheap booze and body odor mixed together along with them dripping sweat.
Hypocrite & closet bigot then.

No, I generally don't drink or go to football matches.

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
1:14pm Mon 23 Jul 12

Shoong wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?
It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.
... and that was only the crew?
No, passengers, normally football fans, they weren't aggressive or anything, it was just the smell of cheap booze and body odor mixed together along with them dripping sweat.
Hypocrite & closet bigot then.

No, I generally don't drink or go to football matches.

Report this post »

Ginger_cyclist says...
1:15pm Mon 23 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
As and when I use a train, I always stand in the door areas. I've seen so many greasy haired folk rubbing their hair over the seats I refuse to sit on them.
It's worse when they're drunk too.
Is it? Early mornings, I don't see many drunks on the train?
It is, coming back from London a few times when i was younger there were always drunks at about 5 or 6 in the evening on the train.
... and that was only the crew?
No, passengers, normally football fans, they weren't aggressive or anything, it was just the smell of cheap booze and body odor mixed together along with them dripping sweat.
They probably didn't like your After shave but I bet they didn't complain!

Why would I wear aftershave before i was 11?

Report this post »

@dailyecho

@the_saints

SceneSouth

Facebook

City to be part of £9bn railway upgrades (From Daily Echo)

Business RSS Feed Send your news, pictures & videos

Southampton to be part of UK's £9bn rail electrification upgrade

Related links

click2find

Jobs

Dating

Homes

Cars

About cookies