Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Thatcher to be given a state funeral
- Thread starter Uncle Spielberg
- Start date
Nemesis
SERIOUSLY!
It has nothing to do with who is saying it-the fact is that airlines do not pay tax on their fuel and therefore it is as good as a subsidy.
British Bulldog
The great escape
- Feb 6, 2006
- 10,971
Excessive pay demands? overstaffed? do me a favour.
London Calling
New member
Actually I do both train and plane, like for like, the services of the French, Danish, Swedish railway systems cannot be beaten by a like for like airline.
I know why people fly, especially if you are outside LOndon. But with the cheap airlines people are putting price before service, whilst with the above railway systems, you get comfort, price and service. They are just good. Then most things are good inSweden and Denmark because people expect good services.
Are Japanese trains better, do they provide family only departments, creches, play rooms, such an extensive system and fast system as well as the SNCF and local network? At a good price. If it does, well done. The French system will only be the second best inthe world.
I notice it is the British government and I presume therefore they are subsidising British airlines. Eventhough I still reserve my right to dis-believe a single word that comes out this Baker's mouth!
Why is it then that other airlines in the ULTRA COMPETITIVE airline industry from other countries, such as RyanAir also offer such cheap flights?
On a simliar vain why have holidays to almost everywhere come down in price? Continental Europe, N America, SE Asia, Australasia? Why do you think this is? Lot's more travel agents, now, than Thomas Cook maybe
?? Don't tell me Baker says that the government is subsidising all those internet travel agents that have sprung up in the last 10 years in this ultra competitive market.Let's leave the travel industry what about electrical goods? Washing Machines, Dishwashers, TV's, DVD's, Tumble Dryers, Fridges/Freezers have all come down in price in real (and quite often in actual terms) because there is incredible competition in this industry.
Why do we need a poll, why can't she just die and then let the people decide.
Nemesis
SERIOUSLY!
Ah-that great British success story-electrical goods manufacturing.
I don't suppose the pricing has anything to do with the people assembling these goods are getting paid a pittance? I understand now-it's all to do with incredible competition.
London Calling
New member
I notice it is the British government and I presume therefore they are subsidising British airlines. Eventhough I still reserve my right to dis-believe a single word that comes out this Baker's mouth!
Why is it then that other airlines in the ULTRA COMPETITIVE airline industry from other countries, such as RyanAir also offer such cheap flights?
On a simliar vain why have holidays to almost everywhere come down in price? Continental Europe, N America, SE Asia, Australasia? Why do you think this is? Lot's more travel agents, now, than Thomas Cook maybe
Let's leave the travel industry what about electrical goods? Washing Machines, Dishwashers, TV's, DVD's, Tumble Dryers, Fridges/Freezers have all come down in price in real (and quite often in actual terms) because there is incredible competition in this industry.
You're right.
Plus relatively your chinese,indian, thai, burmese worker is getting a pittance of the salary a british worker would have got when our industry dominated the world.
I notice you do not answer this point?
Why do you think your holidays abroad so cheap now?
Where does the chinese, Indian, Thai, Burmese worker come into it when you book a package holiday to continental Europe?
London Calling
New member
yOUR RIGHT
But accomadation in Italy is really expensive! Is that due to competition or high taxes and rates? In Bulgaria it is cheap, is that mainly due to low wages, low land values.?
coventrygull
the right one
Your obviously not aware of the nationality of the staff in a hotel then.
Nemesis
SERIOUSLY!
I've just come back from 2 weeks in Cyprus and it was far from cheap. In fact, in real terms it was significantly higher than 2 years ago and no doubt if the airline paid tax on their fuel then the cost would have soared even more. The staff in the hotel are all poorly paid and if they weren't the costs would go up massively.
Governments of most tourist destination countries subsidise their airlines in order to make it affordable for people to visit their countries and the major carriers of most countries have some form of subsidy or other. The possible exception being the US and a quick look at the state of their airline industry suggests that despite the competition, most US airlines are on the brink of bankruptcy and there is usually at least one in Chapter 11.
There is no doubt that competition initially led to prices being affordable but without subsidies of one form or another the prices alone would not be able to support the airlines.
EasyJet and RyanAir? A barbaric free for all for seats (unless you pay extra for speed boarding which still doesn't allocate you a seat), instant coffee at £1.80 a cup, crap sandwiches at £3.50 each, small kiddy size Pringles for £1.50, charges for checked bags but you're only allowed one even if in total they weigh less than 20Kg. Second bag will be extra please. That is how they offer cheap flights-they charge you for everything (in addition to the fuel tax not being charged) and treat you like shit.
When you get to destinations such as Thailand, Vietnam, Bali, etc., the staff at most hotels earn about a dollar a day-although I'm sure that has nothing to do with keeping prices down.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
The real "political" decision at the time was decision of the shareholders to pull out of railway ownership if the government was no longer prepared to pay THEM to keep the system going.
Fortunately, Attlee called their bluff and pushed them out of the picture. Result: the survival of the railways in Britain.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
You'll be arguing next that the National Health Service should operate without public funding.
It's a perfectly viable proposition - provided society could cope with most people not being able to afford expensive geriatric care and other vital, but costly, services and procedures that keep us alive.
Public services "operate at a loss" because they are intrinsically valuable.
Removing subsidies from the rail network would shut down huge parts of the network (including ALL the routes that go into London).
And that would mean no-one could get to work in London. And what would that do for the UK economy?
I am not disputing this....this is why they work well. Most countries see their rail system as part of the social infrastructure and subsidise it accordingly.
....no. I was simply pointing out that competition doesnt always result in the best deal for the customer.
Again, I was simply pointing out that competition doesnt always result in the best deal for the customer.
Do you think that central government should stop paying for things which cant pay their own way then?