Why the railways are in such a state | James O'Brien - The Whole Show 

Russia metro and from across Russia China North Korea not nantionion American and European countries and British are puppet for the American and Boris Johnson stop the peace talks and big business buying Ukraine farm land and Russia giving grains and minerals and oil and gas to alot of countries and Russia economy is growing and Russia has the best medicine in the world and Europe selling wind energy and buying India oil and gas Russia selling oil and gas to India and EU members buying India oil and gas

They were awful

Same thing happened with water, underfunded for years and so when privatisation came about it looked like an improvement but we can all see how that played out in the long term.

@@pipins3616 Yes - but if they were given as much money as the privatised railways were, would they have been as awful.

​@@dotty1774 Right because the money doesn't go back into the system it makes it's way back to those who now own our assets and are usually pumped back into European corporations and shareholders pockets. Same has been happening with the NHS private contractors are bleeding it dry but they blame the NHS.

don't be so silly, people have to be paid for taking risks, even you

@@tedtedtedtedted How does this contradict my statement in any way?

@@erebusvonmori8050 how are you being paid for risk if your only being compensated for expenses ?

@@tedtedtedtedted The payment is the money greater than expenses. What's hard to understand here?

@@tedtedtedtedted Where's the risk? Buy a house for £X. If no-one rents it, sell it for £X. What we have now is a near risk-free situation where someone with capital, or the ability to borrow, buys a property and gets someone else (without the capital or ability to borrow) to pay for it. The former is wealthier than the latter by definition and gets to walk away with a free property after 25 years or so. While the poorer person (or string of poorer people) who has actually paid for the property walks away with zip. The arguement often made is that they'd lived in the property for 25 years, but this is invalid in the extreme. If they'd have been in a viable position to buy the property themselves, then they'd have lived in it for 25 years plus still have the property. This is as clear an example of the rich getting richer on the backs of the poorer that one can imagine, and no meaningful arguement can claim it not to be parasitic.

Under the lib dems in Aberdeen council, they sold lots of property to a local developer for silly amounts 1.00 10.00 places which were worth lots more. All to go into the portfolio of their mate

Exactly. If they're not paying the rent or trash the place, that's why _for_ fault eviction exist.

There is one. Somebody gets a job abroad and rents out their house. Job ends, they come back and want to move back into THEIR house. There has to be a point at which they can evict the tenant to do so.. Tenant is not at fault, but the owner has to be able to move back into their own house at some point. Maybe it's at the end of the current tenancy period, but they need to have some way to end the tenancy. If someone who moves abroad for a 2 year contract is not going to have the ability to move back into their house at the end of the contract, why would they rent the place out at all?

Nationalised workers took pride in their asset and fiercely protected it. Some, undoubtably, should be reinstated.

Yeah but this is London and our politicians love a bit of hysteria 😂

Read Chomsky on the outsourcing of public services: rarely cheaper.

It actually costs significantly more to subsidise the private companies than it ever did to operate british rail.

@@Multipew About a 11 billion pound subsidy in 2022/23. That's 1300 pound per taxpayer that year.

​@@rayglenister9799on top of what each person pays to actually travel too.

@@Multipewalways did, even pre WWII the private rail companies were heavily subsidised.

All of the issues we are having now with all of these and the housing crisis is directly due to Thatcher and the globalist privatisation project of the neo-con world leaders. It's literally stripped this country bare.

And all the people who couldn't afford their mortgages which the banks then foreclosed on, they should get their homes back too then, right?

@@sandorclegane3658 That would be lovely, but very difficult to fund and implement in a fair manner. However stopping a financial meltdown the likes of which not seen since 1929 - well draw your own conclusions...

@@alanbarker2279 the only thing in the way of saving people's homes is greed and corruption. How many billions and trillions is doled out in "aid" for foreign wars? It's all a sham, bud, and entirely fabricated.

I believe it was Iceland who prosecuted those involved but then it's a fairer country with women in power.

Yes Sir and all jobs for people.

My thoughts too

You do know you don't have to watch, don't you?

@@mickreaddin4979 I love the channel. How about I keep watching and don’t move to the UK?

​@@AndyWarpolCome on, be fair! Your comment can be read as criticism?

@@mickreaddin4979 in a world of hammers, all you see is nails.

​@@AndyWarpolIt's very true, I am naturally cynical. But tbf, you could have been a little more specific. As I said, it can be read from two angles.

Thank you for your nerd service!!

I recall that in the 1960's, (USA excluded) that there was no national train service that made a profit. Making profit from running trains, maintaining infrastructure and workforce to run it, is almost impossible unless lines are cut, services and staff reduced and fares regularly increased. The concept of ESSENTIAL SERVICE is relegated to a demanding PROFIT making concern and this 'contradiction' lies at the centre of the problem. Large subsidies, increased every year, are needed to support a complex, money hungry rail system with the dual purpose of keeping it moving and show that 'Privatisation' works.

I have just read that JR, a private rail company in Japan, account for 60% of the passenger market and receive NO subsidies from the Government as it maintains a reasonably profit while providing an efficient SERVICE.

One half right

@martinhumble. Low taxes for which section of society ? That is the question.

Genuine question... why don't you remember British Rail? I remember it, and i'm in my 30's...

It was ONE network. Buy ONE ticket at a British Rail station and it would take you anywhere. Complexity of Rail today, equates to pricey inefficiency. I can remember a simpler and better SERVICE. Bring it back.

Saturday morning kids tv in the late 60s

Labour are nationalising the operating companies by waiting for their contracts to expire, so doesn't cost a penny for that.

Then take your own cheese and tomato sandwiches. Kebabs are decidedly unhealthy anyway.

Milky milky...

Stupidity. Bad luck. Bad circumstances. Do you think all the hospitality groups that failed during Covid did so because they could have predicted a pandemic? And Wetherspoons did so well because they tossed their employees under a bus at the first signs of trouble. Hardly an endorsement. Many businesses succeed because they get lucky in timing. Most businesses fail, if you look at the odds. So, yes, you are wrong.