• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

George Osborne in first class with standard ticket?

Status
Not open for further replies.

blacknight

Member
Joined
19 Feb 2009
Messages
543
Location
Crow Park
What that has to do with the Chancellor of the Exchequer travelling on a train to get from A to B still needs to be explained by you.

It was quoted in one of the press reports that when TM gave figure of £160 for upgrade response from aide was thats expensive & Treasury sets the cost of rail travel.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,466
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
That a politician in one party is an ass, doesn't mean that those in another party are not asses too.

It was the Leader of that particular political party at a Party Conference giving his view on how his party should move forward under his leadership under the title of "One Britain" who made that quote...not a Labour MP outside the Shadow Cabinet. No other party currently espouses that particular vision, so no other MP at any level, from a different party can have any relevance whatsoever to the point that I was endeavoring to make.

My posting was in direct reply to a posting from another forum member on a very specific and ungeneralised matter. This is why, on this specific matter, I cannot accept your attempt at comparison, unfortunately.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,940
Location
UK
don't try and tell people that "we're in it together" when we are quite clearly not!

But we are.

Obviously some people are going to be in a better situation and 'weather the storm' better though, no?

We're not communists.

And some people actually saved money instead of just getting into huge debt because banks were allowed to let people borrow whatever they wanted, lie on mortgage applications and shunt credit card balances from one card to another, thinking they'd never actually have to pay off the money borrowed.

A lot of people got into debt through irresponsible borrowing, and it wasn't because they're paid too little or didn't have a job. I believe the Government had a responsibility to control the lenders.

Now just because MPs didn't do their job and some bankers got carried away, doesn't mean we now have to attack all those with money and expect them to pay for it. They already pay more tax than you or I (well, myself at least) simply because they earn more.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,466
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Suggest you get on your bike & cycle up to a policeman shouting "You F***ing" & then see if nothing happens.

Why have you made this comment in the full knowledge that any forum member who followed your advice on this matter would be committing an offence and liable to the consequences.

If this is your own vision of how to address matters, is this something that you would do yourself to prove the point that you seem to be making....or do you not have the courage of your own convictions?
 

blacknight

Member
Joined
19 Feb 2009
Messages
543
Location
Crow Park
Why do other people have to do investigating to disprove what is being suggested by unnamed sources. Where has the latest thing come from about Mr Osborne having sat in first with a standard class ticket before? Are we to read that as him doing so without upgrading? I presume that's the idea, otherwise another incident of upgrading (and paying the appropriate upgrade) is another non-story. Two non-stories added together still equals a non-story..

Only in Daily Telegraph-that well known leftie supporting newspaper:oops:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Why have you made this comment in the full knowledge that any forum member who followed your advice on this matter would be committing an offence and liable to the consequences.

Comment was made in response to post that "Plebgate" nothing had actually happened but as you rightly state such actions would result in offence being committed.
As for me inciting other forum members to go & commit an offence thats comes down to personal responsibility if I said go take a long walk on short pier how many members would end up in the sea?
 
Last edited:

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,940
Location
UK
Andrew Mitchell as already confessed to swaring at police officers in a public place, what ever happened to the Tory party's claim to be the party of law & order? with zero tolerance of loutish behavior.

I once had an argument with an RPI who was hassling me in first class (when it was declassified). I later went to apologise to him as I felt it was out of character for me, and rude, even though I was totally in the right.

I didn't swear or threaten or anything, but I felt bad nonetheless.

I'm sure everyone has flipped out at least once in their life, possibly due to something else that has happened in the day, and then regretted it. In many cases, a genuine and sincere apology is enough.

These days, it seems that isn't enough. Now you call for that person to be sacked, or sue them for tons of compensation.
 

blacknight

Member
Joined
19 Feb 2009
Messages
543
Location
Crow Park
If this is your own vision of how to address matters, is this something that you would do yourself to prove the point that you seem to be making....or do you not have the courage of your own convictions?

Not my vision but comment on behavior of Ex Chief Whip who resigned having done nothing wrong
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,940
Location
UK
No. A lot of someones got us into this mess, and most of them are called "ordinary voters". Everyone who lives beyond their means, existing on credit cards and the 'never never' is partly responsible for where we are now. There was a great "unwritten pact" between the rulers and the ruled - keep the money flowing, whether we earnt it or no, and we'll keep voting you in.

I'm fully supportive of the plan to reduce the national deficit, even if I disagree with some of the individual decisions. However this incident, and others are not about whether the general drift of Coalition policy is right, or whether MPs work hard or not (some do, some don't), or whether ministers should travel first class (in my opinion they should), it's about how the current administration is desperate to portray themselves as "common people" when they clearly are not.

The public can smell the humbug and hypocrisy, and that's why these stories create a feeding frenzy in the media.

You're totally correct.. and I was effectively saying the problems were down to the people, not Government - but that the Government had a responsibility to protect people. Lord knows Tony Blair liked the nanny state and new rules (oh, and stealth taxes) to protect us.

But when it came to money, people who get a new car on finance, have 20 credit cards and shunt the balance to keep paying the minimum (and banks that had stupidly low minimum payments that meant you got into more debt every month even when paying off the balance) and self certifying a mortgage that relied on suddenly getting a few massive payrises, needed some level of protection.
 

blacknight

Member
Joined
19 Feb 2009
Messages
543
Location
Crow Park
I'm sure everyone has flipped out at least once in their life, possibly due to something else that has happened in the day, and then regretted it. In many cases, a genuine and sincere apology is enough.

These days, it seems that isn't enough. Now you call for that person to be sacked, or sue them for tons of compensation.

In case of Andrew Mitchell by showing a lack of respect to police officers he undermined is own position to enforce party discipline on Tory MPs
 

blacknight

Member
Joined
19 Feb 2009
Messages
543
Location
Crow Park
But when it came to money, people who get a new car on finance, have 20 credit cards and shunt the balance to keep paying the minimum (and banks that had stupidly low minimum payments that meant you got into more debt every month even when paying off the balance) and self certifying a mortgage that relied on suddenly getting a few massive payrises, needed some level of protection.

You can add Pay Day Loan companies to your list of guilty
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
If so, why did you use this as a particular example in your own posting. I cannot recall it being used elsewhere by anyone else, so whose vision do you claim it to be.

Because of the right to free speech in this country you may not like my views but I am entitled to express them & will continue to do so.
 
Last edited:

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,940
Location
UK
Except that unlike your company Treasury is responsible for setting increses in rail fares.
Perception of this government is that its in power but not in control witness the imposing a granny tax yet cutting higher rate of income tax. Trying to impose pasty tax on likes of Greggs a sucessful British company whilst letting multi nationals like Starsbucks get away with tax avoidence. Remember Cameron having pop at Jimmy Carr for doing this but sweet FA on subject of Starbucks.

These things aren't all connected. There's not some flow chart showing that the 'granny tax' allows you to have businesses avoiding tax through legal means.

I was in Starbucks on Saturday (it's a good place to go when feeding a baby out; I am not a massive fan of the coffee or that they didn't pay any corporation tax) and it was busy. Very few people protesting then. And the staff seemed happy to have a job, which might not be the case if Starbucks was paying more tax.

I presume Starbucks isn't avoiding VAT though? I bet that's a few quid.

As I saw it the higher rate of tax was more expensive to manage than it got in, as there aren't that many super rich people. It's like expecting the rich to pay more tax for tax cuts for the middle classes. It doesn't add up because there aren't enough of them.

And the pasty tax was trying to do what needs to be done with VAT (as someone who used to have a business) and that's sort out loads of discrepancies. The problem here was down to whether it was hot or cold, which just goes to show what a mess the VAT system is when it comes to things like that.
 

blacknight

Member
Joined
19 Feb 2009
Messages
543
Location
Crow Park
These things aren't all connected. There's not some flow chart showing that the 'granny tax' allows you to have businesses avoiding tax through legal means.

I was in Starbucks on Saturday (it's a good place to go when feeding a baby out; I am not a massive fan of the coffee or that they didn't pay any corporation tax) and it was busy. Very few people protesting then. And the staff seemed happy to have a job, which might not be the case if Starbucks was paying more tax.

I presume Starbucks isn't avoiding VAT though? I bet that's a few quid.

As I saw it the higher rate of tax was more expensive to manage than it got in, as there aren't that many super rich people. It's like expecting the rich to pay more tax for tax cuts for the middle classes. It doesn't add up because there aren't enough of them.

And the pasty tax was trying to do what needs to be done with VAT (as someone who used to have a business) and that's sort out loads of discrepancies. The problem here was down to whether it was hot or cold, which just goes to show what a mess the VAT system is when it comes to things like that.

Why give multi national company a trading advantage over UK companies paying a large portion of sales revenue in tax to treasury. VAT is collected by company but paid for by customer, employ part time staff & company bypasses NI contributions
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,355
I presume Starbucks isn't avoiding VAT though? I bet that's a few quid.

Starbucks will pay no VAT at all, or rather, any VAT they do pay will be claimed back from the state. They aren't an end consumer.

As to the "they have a job which they wouldn't if Starbucks paid more tax" argument, then surely the optimal solution is to abolish all taxes since everyone will have jobs and thus would have no need for any public services at all.
Its a fallacy unfortunately.
 

blacknight

Member
Joined
19 Feb 2009
Messages
543
Location
Crow Park
Back on thread as press reports show Osborne as on at least 2 occassions attempted to gain first class travel on a standard class ticket. End of
 

Mike395

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
23 May 2009
Messages
3,400
Location
Bedford
This thread isn't progressing anywhere, and has really run its course. As such I am going to close it. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top