Totally agree. If you are moving bulk items from a specific point to another, perfect. Coal to power stations.. Etc etc But once people are involved with different starting points and varying destinations the train is always a compromise. It usually involves 6 journeys. One to station, one to near destination, then the destination all repeated to come back. And thats assuming direct journey.Without a doubt the cheapest and most effective way to move heavy materials and container goods across the world is by rail
The Chinese are pioneering a route across to the capitals of Europe that will cut the journey time from weeks to days for goods and consequently the costs
No other form of transport can compete with this.
Ironically just when moves like this are transforming trade in both directions, we are deliberately cutting ourselves off from the continent.
Stupid move
Amazes me how many people champion rail journeys but last time they used a train was on Flying Scotsman or in OG's case Stephensons Rocket.
For efficient public transport train is not viable. Our network and fiasco proves it.
Yes, people might want an efficient rail system but if so they must pay for it. Either in ticket prices or via taxes and subsidy. Expecting rail to be both cost efficient (profitable) and time efficient for travellers really is pie in the sky. A modern dependable, useable for all profitable system can simply not exist. It must be paid for. There is a high price to pay for a good system and why should not train users subsidise those wishing or capable of utilising system.
Danidl summed it up when he told his he could travel accross northern spain in luxury, quickly for 50p or something. Who is really paying.? Not Danidl.
And the system hasnt brought radical changes to area. Youth unemployment still highest in Europe. Personally, I, d take E9 every time.Pay the tolls and travel to where I want to go. Not some station 40 miles away from beach.
Last edited: