[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Does it talk about fixes, I.e proportional representation, stv, etc?

[-] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

His dad must be very upset that he is making pots and not tools.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Then how do people get to the jobs without any infrastructure

86
submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16859856

No going back

[-] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

Also lots of other places (YouTube as an example) allow you to migrate your account indefinitely, over a decade after they were purchased.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

The rumble of a class 37 makes it my favourite angine I think

[-] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Thank you for such a detailed breakdown, I learned allot.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's a double edged sword as the trees put leaves on the line that make it slippery and can fall on it for trains to hit. They do stabilise steep cuttings though. Something like soil nails or other erosion control measures, combined with smaller trees and bushes would be ideal however more expensive

[-] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

So many things wrong, we were never the envy of Europe, we were the cash cow of Europe. European state operators ran our services for profit to subside their own.

The rolling stock leasing companies are the place where all the money goes, I would rather see them nationalised than the franchises themselves. However as they are owned by the banks we can't touch them.

Also the claim that privatisation increased passenger numbers is wrong, they were going up before.

Additionally the idea that the private system is cost effective is wrong aswell. The subsidy paid out to the rail is higher now than under BR.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Not sure where it is this time but it's an issue that has come up before on this line

[-] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

It doesn't have to necessarily be $1000 per month, it should be the minimum amount of money needed to have food, clothing, shelter etc. just enough to live off. For me £1000 per month is plenty for where I live.

It also isn't just about encouraging higher pay, knowing that workers are not longer worried about putting food on the table when they are voting to strike might influence management decisions on redundancys or workplace safety.

For people who earn 100k, and are living at their means (i.e, spending that amount of money on better food, housing, clothes and other luxurys) it would be a big jump but for the people who would most benifit from ubi it would be more manageable.

Also apologies for replying so late, I either closed the notification accidentally or just never got one.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

The decline of alternatives has not helped the situation aswell.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

It's not that it makes 110 k jobs immediately available, it's that is gives you more leverage with negotiating pay as if you walk away you are not under threat of starving to death. As you would potentially be if you had no income between jobs.

28
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/22408432

What I want to become Vs What I do

view more: next ›

Highstronaught

joined 11 months ago