Seacook
Member
O A pint of Fosters has the same effect as a pint of Pride.
I doubt it. Pride always gave me the runs.
O A pint of Fosters has the same effect as a pint of Pride.
It's fine to suggest closing pubs and clubs, but surely we don't all live to work, so to get rid of things people like to do for leisure is rather silly.
What you do is change attitudes, which can surely be done? It didn't take many years to see almost everyone get addicted to smartphones and spend their life on them, preferring to communicate with people that are miles away than those just metres away. At some point, we're going to need to try and stop this - and I'm very much a victim and was so years before most given my line of work.
I don't propose pricing booze so high it will either be only for the rich, or will just mean people still drink anyway but now have no money left for anything else.
I think this might be the most sensible thing I've read on this thread. Increasing indirect taxes like VAT and alcohol/tobacco duties always disproportionately affect the poorest, and no price is going to stop an addict if they want a drink therefore pushing them further towards 'lawlessness,' or a life of crime, desperation and despondency. To try and ban or tax things into obsolescence is the worst form of populism and scores zilch for policy creativity or dynamism. What's needed is a serious look at 24 hour drinking and how the supermarkets can get away with selling staggering amounts of alcohol for a fraction of what you'd pay in the pubs and clubs (which means people tank-up and are already p*ssed before they even leave the house, rather than going to a pub and consuming alcohol in an at least partially-controlled environment.)
There are plenty of other leisure activities people can do which don't impose negative external costs ...
Alright, I'll fall for it - what reckless behaviour has Brian Souter been up to that you don't like ?
It makes no difference. We have free toilets on the station, of which at least two are always open, and people *still* urinate on the platform, in corners or up the outside wall.The issue with people urinating in town centres once kicked out of closed pubs etc is because there are no public toilets. In most other countries there are, even late at night, albeit for a fee.
It makes no difference. We have free toilets on the station, of which at least two are always open, and people *still* urinate on the platform, in corners or up the outside wall.
No excuse for not providing them. Many would use them.
A pint of Fosters has the same effect as a pint of Pride.
The usual arguments about privatisation of the railways, subsidy and profit, etc. Take your pick from the RUK archives - there's more than enough to choose from![]()
The last Bristol - Frome also has two Guards on board, as do some late Paddington to Bristol trains.
Unless you're Richard Branson. Then you're okay.Ah, so nothing specific to Brian Souter, just the usual dislike of anyone who uses his skills to build up a successful business.
Several train stations I have been in with toilets and yet seen people urinating somewhere that is not the toilet .
Hell in Manchester City Center I have seen someone urinating on the side of the structure that is actually a public toilet .
The UK's non-provision of public toilets is a scandal. And closing station toilets at 8-9pm is as well. Keep them open, and have attendants on duty to prevent antisocial behaviour.
Neil
Yeah, and super rammed! Done this on either an advance back home or last trip on a rover to get back to Trowbridge, I've never had a ticket check on this, weather any of the party goers on board have one is another matter!
Highly unlikely. These are the sort of trains where the sensible approach is simply to get them there. Though a decent Guard should certainly patrol the train, particularly if he has a colleague to assist him.