SWTrains provide half a dozen free railway tickets each year
covering the whole of their network, for annual season ticket holders.
We made full use of this freedom to travel without charge
by visiting maytrees min. at Exeter this Sunday.
So much criticism of the UK's railways system seems to be based on
pre de-nationalisation concepts. Today clean fast (privatised) trains
between Wimbledon and Exeter St Davids are
the norm serving small and large stations even on Sunday
and on time. In pre-privatisation
days there would also have been no chance of
long suffering British Rail season ticket holders
being rewarded for their loyalty with free weekend travel.
Exeter itself has a great university (so maytrees min reports)
and a lovely old Cathedral and Cathedral close, but its main
streets are full of dull chain stores - very few of the idiosyncratic
or artisan shops that an old cathedral city deserves.
The awayday was a great success and a good advertisement
for the benefit of a stint at university away from home
as well as for SWTrains.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Micro Democracy - CPZ in SW20
Around about in SW20 car parking restrictions and yellow line prohibitions abound.
However an oasis of yellow line free, uncontrolled parking anarchy is still to
be found in a few streets including my own, half way between Raynes Park SW20 and Wimbledon Broadway SW19 town centres.
The local Merton council seemed to seek as governments everywhere do,
to control this uncontrolled parking state and 'consulted' the local residents as a precursor I supposed, to imposing what they term as a CPZ - a Controlled Parking Zone.
The results of this consultation were published this week and showed that by
a large majority locals do not want a CPZ. I was much surprised and pleased
then to receive a letter from Merton, to the effect that the Council
had decided to respect the locals' wishes by not imposing the CPZ after all.
This success may be short lived however because when governments want
a result which the people don't at first support, they can go on and on
organising referenda on the issue until a 'no' vote becomes a 'yes'.
Doubtless Irish Noes to Lisbon will be revisited in due course.
On the other hand the denizens of those parts of SW20 and SW19 who already
have CPZs I doubt will be given a fresh opportunity to abandon their CPZs
any time soon.
As for a referendum about whether the citizens of the UK would
wish to quit the EC - forget it.
However an oasis of yellow line free, uncontrolled parking anarchy is still to
be found in a few streets including my own, half way between Raynes Park SW20 and Wimbledon Broadway SW19 town centres.
The local Merton council seemed to seek as governments everywhere do,
to control this uncontrolled parking state and 'consulted' the local residents as a precursor I supposed, to imposing what they term as a CPZ - a Controlled Parking Zone.
The results of this consultation were published this week and showed that by
a large majority locals do not want a CPZ. I was much surprised and pleased
then to receive a letter from Merton, to the effect that the Council
had decided to respect the locals' wishes by not imposing the CPZ after all.
This success may be short lived however because when governments want
a result which the people don't at first support, they can go on and on
organising referenda on the issue until a 'no' vote becomes a 'yes'.
Doubtless Irish Noes to Lisbon will be revisited in due course.
On the other hand the denizens of those parts of SW20 and SW19 who already
have CPZs I doubt will be given a fresh opportunity to abandon their CPZs
any time soon.
As for a referendum about whether the citizens of the UK would
wish to quit the EC - forget it.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Collateral Damage
Another week when the media has been full of little more than news of
financial meltdowns around the globe. Bankruptcies to bailouts
now extending beyond the financial markets to a whole country - Iceland is the first
but will it be the last? For my own part a switch of a few pounds from Royal Bank
of Scotland current account to Royal Bank of Scotland shares at c.69p seemed
worthwhile as the current account interest rate is tiny and the share price
too low (imho) reflecting the panic selling of past days.
Yet all this financial news fascinating though it is for those who take
an interest in matters fiscal, financial and politcal, masks the human
tragedies that are still affecting people's every day lives
asmuch now as they were before. Zimbabawe for example was begining to move
to some kind of government less than absolute Mugabwe dictatorship
under pressure from the world's media. That pressure has gone
with the credit crunch etc news and Zimbabwe has stalled.
Darfur? Global warming and other fundamental issues about human life and
our very existance are off the front page. Those who ner'do well
are able to have their field days now with far reduced risk of critical pressure from the rest of us.
financial meltdowns around the globe. Bankruptcies to bailouts
now extending beyond the financial markets to a whole country - Iceland is the first
but will it be the last? For my own part a switch of a few pounds from Royal Bank
of Scotland current account to Royal Bank of Scotland shares at c.69p seemed
worthwhile as the current account interest rate is tiny and the share price
too low (imho) reflecting the panic selling of past days.
Yet all this financial news fascinating though it is for those who take
an interest in matters fiscal, financial and politcal, masks the human
tragedies that are still affecting people's every day lives
asmuch now as they were before. Zimbabawe for example was begining to move
to some kind of government less than absolute Mugabwe dictatorship
under pressure from the world's media. That pressure has gone
with the credit crunch etc news and Zimbabwe has stalled.
Darfur? Global warming and other fundamental issues about human life and
our very existance are off the front page. Those who ner'do well
are able to have their field days now with far reduced risk of critical pressure from the rest of us.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
$700Billion USA Bailout - Wither Moral Hazard?
In more normal times the business and financial news stay
in their allocated space in the media, near the backpages or as
an end note on radio and tv with the closing figures for the FTSE100
and DOW indices.
The past few weeks however have seen financial news
spilling out all over the place from the headlines to
political pages and gossip columns. Apocalyptic headlines
presaging the end of the financial world as we know it seem
more apt for the religious pages or publications like The Tablet.
The sight of so many derelict looking houses in USA Main Street
whose erstwhile owners had to quit through being unable to
repay their mortgage loans, does give rise to sympathy
for the residents but hardly for those who encouraged them
to over borrow. By all means bail out the poor old duped
mortgagors but why encourage their lenders and financial advisers,
who should have known better, by bailing them out as well?
I posted on Sharecrazy a few days back:
"The UK govt has imho, forgotten about the investing concept of 'moral hazard'.
The USA bail out plan was likewise thrown out
first time round because electors made
plain their distaste for a plan which
appears to allow those who they consider
to blame to get off scott free.
In the UK the BB. (Bradford & Bingley) bail out
is I believe, to be funded by FSA funds. Essentially this means that good banks
will have to pay for profligate ones.
Such failure to recognise moral hazard by letting the profligate banks sink
but instead, getting the good banks pay for bailing out the bad,
encourages the others not to be good.
I agree that innocent savers should be protected, not to mention the taxpayers
but why should any less than innocent savings institutions?
Also though I'm not a BB. PI (private investor)why
should the shares be nationalised without compensation terms
being specified up front-too much hazard and too little govt. morality perhaps?
Additionally is not the 'credit crunch' caused by overborrowing? If so surely interest rates should go up to encourage saving and to deter borrowing?
Yet in these moral hazardless days, naturally the talk is of making borrowing cheaper by lowering interest rates - a moral hazard-free action if ever there was one.
Also illogical and storing up more pain for the future imho "
in their allocated space in the media, near the backpages or as
an end note on radio and tv with the closing figures for the FTSE100
and DOW indices.
The past few weeks however have seen financial news
spilling out all over the place from the headlines to
political pages and gossip columns. Apocalyptic headlines
presaging the end of the financial world as we know it seem
more apt for the religious pages or publications like The Tablet.
The sight of so many derelict looking houses in USA Main Street
whose erstwhile owners had to quit through being unable to
repay their mortgage loans, does give rise to sympathy
for the residents but hardly for those who encouraged them
to over borrow. By all means bail out the poor old duped
mortgagors but why encourage their lenders and financial advisers,
who should have known better, by bailing them out as well?
I posted on Sharecrazy a few days back:
"The UK govt has imho, forgotten about the investing concept of 'moral hazard'.
The USA bail out plan was likewise thrown out
first time round because electors made
plain their distaste for a plan which
appears to allow those who they consider
to blame to get off scott free.
In the UK the BB. (Bradford & Bingley) bail out
is I believe, to be funded by FSA funds. Essentially this means that good banks
will have to pay for profligate ones.
Such failure to recognise moral hazard by letting the profligate banks sink
but instead, getting the good banks pay for bailing out the bad,
encourages the others not to be good.
I agree that innocent savers should be protected, not to mention the taxpayers
but why should any less than innocent savings institutions?
Also though I'm not a BB. PI (private investor)why
should the shares be nationalised without compensation terms
being specified up front-too much hazard and too little govt. morality perhaps?
Additionally is not the 'credit crunch' caused by overborrowing? If so surely interest rates should go up to encourage saving and to deter borrowing?
Yet in these moral hazardless days, naturally the talk is of making borrowing cheaper by lowering interest rates - a moral hazard-free action if ever there was one.
Also illogical and storing up more pain for the future imho "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)