|
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
At 12:05:43 on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 Ar opined:-
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:35:40 -0700, Adrian wrote: A much more common mistake is the misuse of the word "prestigious". To bring this back on topc: Whatever the cost, Crossrail is essential. The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? It's not often recognised that London suffered two devastating blows on successive days in July 2005. On the 7th there was the tube bombings. But the day before London had imposed on it the 2012 Olympics. -- Thoss |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On 25 Mar, 12:56, thoss wrote: At 12:05:43 on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 Ar opined:- On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:35:40 -0700, Adrian wrote: A much more common mistake is the misuse of the word "prestigious". To bring this back on topc: Whatever the cost, Crossrail is essential. The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? It's not often recognised that London suffered two devastating blows on successive days in July 2005. On the 7th there was the tube bombings. But the day before London had imposed on it the 2012 Olympics. -- Thoss Oh you must be so pleased with yourself, what with your being ever so witty... |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
|
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Grumpy Old Man wrote:
Adrian wrote: On Mar 24, 3:25 pm, The Real Doctor wrote: On 24 Mar, 20:13, Adrian wrote: On Mar 24, 12:46 pm, The Real Doctor wrote: On 24 Mar, 18:35, Adrian wrote: To bring this back on topc: Whatever the cost, Crossrail is essential. Essential to /what/? It is essential to London's ongoing function as a financial center. Crossrail will also be useful in helping London's quality of life. It can't be essential to London's ongoing function, because that's ongoing without Crossrail. Perhaps you meant "future development" - but even then, I'd like to see some convincing proof that it's really going to be worth spending £16bn on. Ian If you believe that Europe's financial center should be in Germany, then you should oppose Crossrail. Adrian It'll take more than Crossrail to save London. It is gradually sinking, in a century or two it will be under the water. See JG Ballard's very first novel, The Drowned World. -- Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management decisions. -From “Rollerball” |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Jane Sullivan wrote:
In message , Neil Williams writes On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:58:47 +0000, Jane Sullivan wrote: And if those employees lost their jobs, then that would take several billion pounds out of the local economy of the south-east and, by extension, Britain. But why would they lose their jobs if Crossrail didn't happen? They'd lose their jobs if the financial centre of Europe moved out of London to Frankfurt. Shurely, it's off to Delhi... -- http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683808.html (155 345 at Halifax, 13 Oct 2000) |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Ar wrote:
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:35:40 -0700, Adrian wrote: A much more common mistake is the misuse of the word "prestigious". To bring this back on topc: Whatever the cost, Crossrail is essential. The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? An utter waste of money. Red Ken Livingstone lives in another planet, or should I say, inside a bottle of Whisky?! Many wish he did. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
|
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Jane Sullivan wrote:
In message , Charles Ellson writes Nowadays the whole point might be that with modern technology there is no longer a need for a physical centre as there was in the past when the City of London was full of messengers running around with negotiable documents. I work in IT in the finance industry, at I think the point was not that everyone can telecommute instead of going into an office, but rather that the various offices don't need to be in the same place. You could quite easily put a tower full of stockjobbers and allied trades somwhere miles from the City, like, for example, er ... Canary Wharf Exactly. Although Canary Wharf has missed this point. Instead of distributing offices into the suburbs or wherever, it's created a second City. I should add that i'm not convinced that Mr Ellson's argument is correct. There may be advantages to having offices of related businesses in close physical proximity; it certainly seems to be a pattern of urban development that's been remarkably constant, even after the introduction of the car, the telephone, and all the kinds of electronic communication that have come since. tom -- I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science, with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle and find our way by trial and error, building our road behind us as we proceed. -- Max Born |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In message , at 16:36:51 on
Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grumpy Old Man remarked: The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is it even correct? The bill for the infrastructure is £4.8bn Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? An utter waste of money. And there's an estimated £6Bn benefit, so I'm not as pessimistic as you are. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Andy wrote:
On Mar 25, 8:00*am, The Real Doctor wrote: On 24 Mar, 23:10, Adrian wrote: On Mar 24, 4:00 pm, Dan G wrote: Anyone seen a more detailed costing of the scheme? *Why* is it costing so much more than other, not dissimilar, projects? In part it will cost a lot because it will be (or should be) engineered to a very high standard. *The Jubilee Line extension is a pointer in that respect. But it is predicted to cost more than five times as much as the Jubilee Line extension ... You have clearly never lived in a city where good spacious (1,000 sq ft per person) affordable housing is available to middle class workers. *Or, enjoyed one where a normal comfortable journey to work is 40 minutes or less. And how many people do you think will find good, spacious, affordable housing as a result of this line. It'll knock quarter of an hour, tops, off the journey onto London - are those fifteen minutes really deterring millions from moving to good, spacious, affordable housing? But wasn't the main justification for crossrail the relief of the overcrowding already present on existing lines, as well as allowing for predicted growth. It will take a fair number of people off the Central line (and other Underground lines) as well as providing extra capacity on the National Rail lines to either side. Except it won't. It will relieve the Central line west of Stratford, for sure, which in practice means Stratford to Oxford Circus. But it doesn't actually add any capacity at all to the Great Eastern or Western railways - every path that Crossrail will use is currently used by a normal train. Crossrail trains will be a bit longer, but you could deliver the same capacity increase by adapting those lines for longer trains without the central tunnel bit for a lot less money. The fact that it will reduce journey times is an added benefit, but not the main justification for the construction. It also won't reduce journey times much. Trips you can make with Crossrail can currently be made with train plus Central line via quite easy changes at Stratford or Ealing Broadway (or more painful ones at Liverpool Street or Paddington, after a quicker run to the terminal). It will make the trips a lot more convenient by eliminating those changes, but not hugely faster. tom -- I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science, with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle and find our way by trial and error, building our road behind us as we proceed. -- Max Born |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Mar 25, 5:01*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Andy wrote: On Mar 25, 8:00*am, The Real Doctor wrote: On 24 Mar, 23:10, Adrian wrote: On Mar 24, 4:00 pm, Dan G wrote: Anyone seen a more detailed costing of the scheme? *Why* is it costing so much more than other, not dissimilar, projects? In part it will cost a lot because it will be (or should be) engineered to a very high standard. *The Jubilee Line extension is a pointer in that respect. But it is predicted to cost more than five times as much as the Jubilee Line extension ... You have clearly never lived in a city where good spacious (1,000 sq ft per person) affordable housing is available to middle class workers. *Or, enjoyed one where a normal comfortable journey to work is 40 minutes or less. And how many people do you think will find good, spacious, affordable housing as a result of this line. It'll knock quarter of an hour, tops, off the journey onto London - are those fifteen minutes really deterring millions from moving to good, spacious, affordable housing? But wasn't the main justification for crossrail the relief of the overcrowding already present on existing lines, as well as allowing for predicted growth. It will take a fair number of people off the Central line (and other Underground lines) as well as providing extra capacity on the National Rail lines to either side. Except it won't. It will relieve the Central line west of Stratford, for sure, which in practice means Stratford to Oxford Circus. But it doesn't actually add any capacity at all to the Great Eastern or Western railways - every path that Crossrail will use is currently used by a normal train. Crossrail trains will be a bit longer, but you could deliver the same capacity increase by adapting those lines for longer trains without the central tunnel bit for a lot less money. It will also relieve the Circle, Met, H&C, the Bakerloo and the Jubilee, at least. If you look back, the relief of already overcrowed underground lines was always the main reason behind the plans. The services to/from the West will gain a considerable increase in capacity, with 10 car trains replacing the current shorter DMUs. The services to/from the East will generally also gain in train length, as the stopping trains are mostly (all?) eight cars. The fact that it will reduce journey times is an added benefit, but not the main justification for the construction. It also won't reduce journey times much. Trips you can make with Crossrail can currently be made with train plus Central line via quite easy changes at Stratford or Ealing Broadway (or more painful ones at Liverpool Street or Paddington, after a quicker run to the terminal). It will make the trips a lot more convenient by eliminating those changes, but not hugely faster. There will certainly be faster journey times on the western side, as the EMUs will accelerate considerably better than the Turbos and with all (at least during the peak) trains being of the same type pathing will be slightly easier. There is also the consideration of having to leave time for delays on the underground when heading home. A change of train at either Ealing or Paddington means having to pad your journey a fair amount. I do agree that this is less of a problem on the Eastern side though. Don't forget that the capacity doesn't just deal with the trains, but the space needed at the stations for interchange. A fair amount of the costs of Crossrail stations in central london will be needed anyway as the current underground stations can't cope. Oxford Circus is sometimes closed due to overcrowding, and Tottenham Court Road always a bit of a nightmare to get around, even off peak. tom -- I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science, with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle and find our way by trial and error, building our road behind us as we proceed. -- Max Born |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On 25 Mar, 16:59, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:36:51 on Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grumpy Old Man remarked: The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is it even correct? The bill for the infrastructure is £4.8bn The total cost to the public purse is currently estimated at £9.325bn. Source- DCMS December 2007 press release: http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_...et_10dec07.htm or via http://tinyurl.com/3bp5dm Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? An utter waste of money. And there's an estimated £6Bn benefit, so I'm not as pessimistic as you are. Depends upon how you measure the various benefits of course, and the difficulty of quantifying them in monetary terms. I remain a supporter of the 2012 Games, I think it'll do a lot of good in a great many different ways. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In message
, at 10:47:51 on Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Mizter T remarked: The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is it even correct? The bill for the infrastructure is £4.8bn The total cost to the public purse is currently estimated at £9.325bn. Of which 4.8bn is for the infrastructure, and only 6Bn is directly attributable to the ODA. So where does the £18Bn come from?? Source- DCMS December 2007 press release: http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_...archive_2007/d cms_TJ-odabaselinebudget_10dec07.htm or via http://tinyurl.com/3bp5dm Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? An utter waste of money. And there's an estimated £6Bn benefit, so I'm not as pessimistic as you are. Depends upon how you measure the various benefits of course, and the difficulty of quantifying them in monetary terms. They aren't going to bulldoze the stadiums and village, or undo the public transport improvements. And some money will come from ticket sales and TV rights, and the slightly less quantifiable "tourism" aspect. I remain a supporter of the 2012 Games, I think it'll do a lot of good in a great many different ways. I'm disappointed they aren't doing the rowing in Nottingham - I could have walked to the venue! -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In message
Mizter T wrote: On 25 Mar, 16:59, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:36:51 on Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grumpy Old Man remarked: The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is it even correct? The bill for the infrastructure is £4.8bn The total cost to the public purse is currently estimated at £9.325bn. Source- DCMS December 2007 press release: http://www.culture.gov.uk/Reference_...et_10dec07.htm or via http://tinyurl.com/3bp5dm Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? An utter waste of money. And there's an estimated £6Bn benefit, so I'm not as pessimistic as you are. Depends upon how you measure the various benefits of course, and the difficulty of quantifying them in monetary terms. I remain a supporter of the 2012 Games, I think it'll do a lot of good in a great many different ways. Well it will certainly help the pharmaceutical industry and the modern equivalents of CMOT Dibbler but I'm not sure what good a celebration of cheating and corruption is going to do. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In article ,
Adrian wrote: On Mar 24, 3:25=A0pm, The Real Doctor wrote: It can't be essential to London's ongoing function, because that's ongoing without Crossrail. Perhaps you meant "future development" - but even then, I'd like to see some convincing proof that it's really going to be worth spending =A316bn on. Ian If you believe that Europe's financial center should be in Germany, then you should oppose Crossrail. Should we be thinking of a financial *centre* at all? It seems such a 19th century idea... Cat. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:24:50 +0000, Jane Sullivan
wrote: In message , Neil Williams writes On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:58:47 +0000, Jane Sullivan wrote: And if those employees lost their jobs, then that would take several billion pounds out of the local economy of the south-east and, by extension, Britain. But why would they lose their jobs if Crossrail didn't happen? They'd lose their jobs if the financial centre of Europe moved out of London to Frankfurt. So - learn German and move to Frankfurt. Lower cost of + higher standard of living for the sake of making a little linguistic effort. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:24:50 +0000, Jane Sullivan
wrote: But why would they lose their jobs if Crossrail didn't happen? They'd lose their jobs if the financial centre of Europe moved out of London to Frankfurt. That they might. But I fail to see why that would happen purely on account of the construction or otherwise of a single railway line. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:38:58 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote: Do you propose that further growth of London is feasible, then? I'd say it was inevitable. I'd say we should be doing our utmost to avoid it, unless it is things that can go on only in London. This is true, though the difference between rents and mortgages in many places suggests that there is not a correct balance. Which means? It is vastly cheaper to rent than buy on a monthly basis in many places these days. Certainly, in Milton Keynes one would pay about £500 per month to rent a one-bed flat but £700-800 per month to purchase it using a repayment mortgage. The main reason for this is that there is a glut of rental property on the market. Given the limited amount of property, this will necessarily cause purchase prices to rise. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
"Neil Williams" wrote It is vastly cheaper to rent than buy on a monthly basis in many places these days. Certainly, in Milton Keynes one would pay about £500 per month to rent a one-bed flat but £700-800 per month to purchase it using a repayment mortgage. The main reason for this is that there is a glut of rental property on the market. Given the limited amount of property, this will necessarily cause purchase prices to rise. If the owners of buy to rent property start to think that property sale prices have stopped rising they will sell and invest the money elsewhere - this will increase the stock of sale property and bring prices down, while reducing the stock of rental property pushing rental costs up. Peter |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
"Neil Williams" wrote in message ... On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:24:50 +0000, Jane Sullivan wrote: But why would they lose their jobs if Crossrail didn't happen? They'd lose their jobs if the financial centre of Europe moved out of London to Frankfurt. That they might. But I fail to see why that would happen purely on account of the construction or otherwise of a single railway line. or even on the construction or otherwise of another airport runway. peter |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Am Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:53:51 UTC, schrieb Mike Roebuck
auf uk.railway : They'd lose their jobs if the financial centre of Europe moved out of London to Frankfurt. So - learn German and move to Frankfurt. You don't need to speak German to work in many of the banks here. Cheers, L.W. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
|
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:59:55 +0000, Roland Perry
mangled uncounted electrons thus: In message , at 16:36:51 on Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Grumpy Old Man remarked: The London 2012 Olympics will cost £18bn, is that essential? Is it even correct? The bill for the infrastructure is £4.8bn Is that any less bankrupting then Crossrail? An utter waste of money. And there's an estimated £6Bn benefit, so I'm not as pessimistic as you are. The good citizens of Montreal were paying a special tax to meet the cost of the games (held in 1976) until 2006, so a friend who lives out there tells me... Martin D. Pay Holding the Olympics is a ridiculous luxury that we simply don't need. IMO, of course... |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In message
"Lüko Willms" wrote: Am Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:53:51 UTC, schrieb Mike Roebuck auf uk.railway : They'd lose their jobs if the financial centre of Europe moved out of London to Frankfurt. So - learn German and move to Frankfurt. You don't need to speak German to work in many of the banks here. But it would help for going shopping after work... -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
"Lüko Willms" writes:
So - learn German and move to Frankfurt. You don't need to speak German to work in many of the banks here. My impression is that most educated Germans speak better English than I do... :-/ [ The first time I went to Germany, I came out of the airport, and tried to ask a question in German at a newsstand -- whereupon the newsagent started yelling at me to "speak English!" :-O It was kind of a relief to go to (former) East Germany (this was just after unification) where I could practice speaking German without risking ridicule... ] -Miles -- Opposition, n. In politics the party that prevents the Goverment from running amok by hamstringing it. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:47:51 on Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Mizter T remarked: I remain a supporter of the 2012 Games, I think it'll do a lot of good in a great many different ways. I'm disappointed they aren't doing the rowing in Nottingham - I could have walked to the venue! Yeah, well Nottingham didn't win the Olympic competition, did it, London did! As a compromise, i propose the rowing be held ing Mottingham. They can do it on the lake in the nature reserve: http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl...669&t=k &z=17 It'll be a pretty tactical course, that. tom -- I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science, with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle and find our way by trial and error, building our road behind us as we proceed. -- Max Born |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Mizter T wrote:
I remain a supporter of the 2012 Games, I think it'll do a lot of good in a great many different ways. Great! You can pay my council tax bill, then. tom -- I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science, with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle and find our way by trial and error, building our road behind us as we proceed. -- Max Born |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Andy wrote:
On Mar 25, 5:01*pm, Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Andy wrote: But wasn't the main justification for crossrail the relief of the overcrowding already present on existing lines, as well as allowing for predicted growth. It will take a fair number of people off the Central line (and other Underground lines) as well as providing extra capacity on the National Rail lines to either side. Except it won't. It will relieve the Central line west of Stratford, for sure, which in practice means Stratford to Oxford Circus. But it doesn't actually add any capacity at all to the Great Eastern or Western railways - every path that Crossrail will use is currently used by a normal train. Crossrail trains will be a bit longer, but you could deliver the same capacity increase by adapting those lines for longer trains without the central tunnel bit for a lot less money. It will also relieve the Circle, Met, H&C, the Bakerloo and the Jubilee, at least. You're right, it will relieve the Circle/Met/H&C between Liverpool Street and Farringdon, my bad. The Bakerloo too, but this is not exactly overcrowded as it stands. The Jubilee? If you look back, the relief of already overcrowed underground lines was always the main reason behind the plans. Kind of. I've read all of the rail studies that have led to Crossrail over the last 20 years or so, and one thing that's conspicuously absent is a solid justification. The studies take it as a starting point that an east-west rail tunnel will be built, and just look at the details of how best to do it. The services to/from the West will gain a considerable increase in capacity, with 10 car trains replacing the current shorter DMUs. The services to/from the East will generally also gain in train length, as the stopping trains are mostly (all?) eight cars. True. All of which could be done without the tunnel, for a fraction of the price. The fact that it will reduce journey times is an added benefit, but not the main justification for the construction. It also won't reduce journey times much. Trips you can make with Crossrail can currently be made with train plus Central line via quite easy changes at Stratford or Ealing Broadway (or more painful ones at Liverpool Street or Paddington, after a quicker run to the terminal). It will make the trips a lot more convenient by eliminating those changes, but not hugely faster. There will certainly be faster journey times on the western side, as the EMUs will accelerate considerably better than the Turbos and with all (at least during the peak) trains being of the same type pathing will be slightly easier. Again, could be done without the tunnel. There is also the consideration of having to leave time for delays on the underground when heading home. A change of train at either Ealing or Paddington means having to pad your journey a fair amount. I do agree that this is less of a problem on the Eastern side though. I wonder how much rearranging Ealing Broadway for better interchange from NR to LU would cost. Probably a lot. Don't forget that the capacity doesn't just deal with the trains, but the space needed at the stations for interchange. A fair amount of the costs of Crossrail stations in central london will be needed anyway as the current underground stations can't cope. Oxford Circus is sometimes closed due to overcrowding, and Tottenham Court Road always a bit of a nightmare to get around, even off peak. Do we know how much of the budget is for this? My understanding was that Oxford Circus wasn't going to be rebuilt; the Crossrail station would be essentialy separate. It thus has a slightly marginal effect on overcrowding - the people relieved onto Crossrail will no longer be clogging the place up, but plenty of other people will. No idea about TCR. tom -- I believe there is no philosophical high-road in science, with epistemological signposts. No, we are in a jungle and find our way by trial and error, building our road behind us as we proceed. -- Max Born |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On 25 Mar, 23:49, Tom Anderson wrote:
The Jubilee? To Docklands. AIUI the Jubilee between London Bridge and North Greenwich is already one of the most congested bits of the network. True. All of which could be done without the tunnel, for a fraction of the price. And without increasing any capacity from the termini to where people work/shop/go out/etc, which is the whole point of the current iteration of the project. Again, could be done without the tunnel. And where do you plan to build the extra platforms at Paddington and Liverpool Street? Do we know how much of the budget is for this? My understanding was that Oxford Circus wasn't going to be rebuilt; the Crossrail station would be essentialy separate. It thus has a slightly marginal effect on overcrowding - the people relieved onto Crossrail will no longer be clogging the place up, but plenty of other people will. No idea about TCR. Slightly marginal? The two Crossrail stations adjacent to Oxford Circus will have enormous entrances at the ends nearest to it, exactly to attract the crowds away without overcrowding the actual Oxford Circus area. In theory at least they're hoping to attract away a lot more passengers. U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ A blog about transport projects in London |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On 25 Mar, 23:27, Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Mizter T wrote: I remain a supporter of the 2012 Games, I think it'll do a lot of good in a great many different ways. Great! You can pay my council tax bill, then. What is it, like an extra £20 a year on the London council tax. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In message
, Mizter T writes What is it, like an extra £20 a year on the London council tax. It depends what council tax band your house is in. For my small terraced house it's almost £29 a year ... for the next ten years. :( Every Olympic bid trumpets the supposed benefits of hosting the games, but these benefits are very rarely realised. Barcelona was one of the few exceptions, although even they have seen less tourist growth than comparable cities that didn't host the Olympics. But Barcelona is certainly a much better looking city than it was before the games. I think the London games stand a better chance of delivering benefits than most, but I suspect it will represent a very poor return on the huge amount of money invested. -- Paul Terry |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Mizter T wrote:
On 25 Mar, 23:27, Tom Anderson wrote: On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, Mizter T wrote: I remain a supporter of the 2012 Games, I think it'll do a lot of good in a great many different ways. Great! You can pay my council tax bill, then. What is it, like an extra £20 a year on the London council tax. If that is not much, you can pay mine too! -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Am Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:25:57 UTC, schrieb Graeme Wall
auf uk.railway : So - learn German and move to Frankfurt. You don't need to speak German to work in many of the banks here. But it would help for going shopping after work... Generally, you don't have to know the local language to buy something, gestures of yes and no, indicating numbers by figures or the amount of money would be enough. And especially in a supermarket you don't talk to the shelves but take what you want. And speaking some other language than German might be an advantage when the sales personnel originates from a country whose language you master. Cheers, L.W. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Mar 26, 12:11*am, Mr Thant
wrote: On 25 Mar, 23:49, Tom Anderson wrote: The Jubilee? To Docklands. AIUI the Jubilee between London Bridge and North Greenwich is already one of the most congested bits of the network. Indeed, why do you think that TfL bought forward the lengthening of the Jubilee line trains to seven cars by several years. It was because the Waterloo / London Bridge - Docklands section was already getting overcrowded. The Crossrail service from the Abbey Wood will take a fair part of that burden. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In message
"Lüko Willms" wrote: Am Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:25:57 UTC, schrieb Graeme Wall auf uk.railway : So - learn German and move to Frankfurt. You don't need to speak German to work in many of the banks here. But it would help for going shopping after work... Generally, you don't have to know the local language to buy something, gestures of yes and no, indicating numbers by figures or the amount of money would be enough. And especially in a supermarket you don't talk to the shelves but take what you want. And speaking some other language than German might be an advantage when the sales personnel originates from a country whose language you master. You don't have to take everything quite so literally... As for your last paragraph, I speak rather less Turkish than German. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Am Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:50:54 UTC, schrieb Graeme Wall
auf uk.railway : And speaking some other language than German might be an advantage when the sales personnel originates from a country whose language you master. As for your last paragraph, I speak rather less Turkish than German. Well, the salesperson might have migrated from Pakistan, Sri Lanka, or India... You don't have to take everything quite so literally... Don't take it personal. I like to tell what I think about interesting subjects. Have a nice day! Cheers, L.W. |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Mike Roebuck wrote:
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:24:50 +0000, Jane Sullivan wrote: In message , Neil Williams writes On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:58:47 +0000, Jane Sullivan wrote: And if those employees lost their jobs, then that would take several billion pounds out of the local economy of the south-east and, by extension, Britain. But why would they lose their jobs if Crossrail didn't happen? They'd lose their jobs if the financial centre of Europe moved out of London to Frankfurt. So - learn German and move to Frankfurt. Lower cost of + higher standard of living for the sake of making a little linguistic effort. You'd need to learn German and then learn Rhineland German. -- Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management decisions. -From “Rollerball” |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On 26 Mar, 11:50, Graeme Wall wrote:
Generally, you don't have to know the local language to buy something, gestures of yes and no, indicating numbers by figures or the amount of money would be enough. And especially in a supermarket you don't talk to the shelves but take what you want. And speaking some other language than German might be an advantage when the sales personnel originates from a country whose language you master. You don't have to take everything quite so literally... As for your last paragraph, I speak rather less Turkish than German. Oddly enough, I've just successfully purchased six months' supply of contact lenses [at 1/3 of UK opticians' prices for the same brand made in the same US factory. Can we wind up that cartel next please?], some groceries and toiletries, and a toasted sandwich - all from people who speak Turkish and no English. I'm in Istanbul rather than Frankfurt though -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
In message
"Lüko Willms" wrote: Am Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:50:54 UTC, schrieb Graeme Wall auf uk.railway : And speaking some other language than German might be an advantage when the sales personnel originates from a country whose language you master. As for your last paragraph, I speak rather less Turkish than German. Well, the salesperson might have migrated from Pakistan, Sri Lanka, or India... If I put a smiley on the end, would it make it more obvious that I was cracking a slight (very slight!) joke? Perhaps I'd better leave out the line about not speaking Urdu. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Graeme Wall wrote:
In message "Lüko Willms" wrote: Am Wed, 26 Mar 2008 09:50:54 UTC, schrieb Graeme Wall auf uk.railway : And speaking some other language than German might be an advantage when the sales personnel originates from a country whose language you master. As for your last paragraph, I speak rather less Turkish than German. Well, the salesperson might have migrated from Pakistan, Sri Lanka, or India... If I put a smiley on the end, would it make it more obvious that I was cracking a slight (very slight!) joke? You know what they say about the German sense of humour... Robin |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk