|
Post by ahinton on Dec 12, 2013 18:03:25 GMT -5
On the contrary, no money is required, ahinton! Please tell me on what grounds you make this extraordinary assumption! And, while you're about it, why not steal a plane, some fuel and a pilot and support staff that you can hold at gunpoint respectively to fly it and run the operation for no pay - as well, of course, as a decent hanger and some land on which to put it (best do this first, actually) - in order to prove your point!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2013 18:59:54 GMT -5
Tut tut Mr. H! No need for "guns" or "money"! The socialistic pilots of the future will all be skilled volunteers, contributing their best efforts to take to the Antipodes all the little old ladies who wish to go there.
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 12, 2013 19:03:20 GMT -5
Tut tut Mr. H! No need for "guns" or "money"! When and where did I ever mention "guns"? The socialistic pilots of the future On the rather wildly fantasistic assumption that there might be any... will all be skilled volunteers but on what shall they live while giving of their expert services in the meantime? contributing their best efforts to take to the Antipodes all the little old ladies who wish to go there. Ah, well, perhaps that might be their get-out, then; maybe none of them will want to go!
|
|
|
Post by Gerard on Dec 12, 2013 19:10:11 GMT -5
When and where did I ever mention "guns"? In the member's most recent post! (Reply number 60). Odd that he does not see it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2013 3:30:24 GMT -5
Good morning to you all! I trust that all is well with all of you. If I may nevertheless address both your points directly, ahinton: On the contrary, no money is required, ahinton! a. Please tell me on what grounds you make this extraordinary assumption!What extraordinary assumption? b. And, while you're about it, why not steal a plane, some fuel and a pilot and support staff that you can hold at gunpoint respectively to fly it and run the operation for no pay - as well, of course, as a decent hanger and some land on which to put it (best do this first, actually) - in order to prove your point! What point?
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 13, 2013 4:29:45 GMT -5
When and where did I ever mention "guns"? In the member's most recent post! (Reply number 60). Odd that he does not see it. I mentioned "gunpoint", not "guns" per se - and I'd have thought that the purely figurative context in which I did so would have sopken for itself (which evidently it didn't).
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 13, 2013 4:33:45 GMT -5
Good morning to you all! I trust that all is well with all of you. If I may nevertheless address both your points directly, ahinton: a. Please tell me on what grounds you make this extraordinary assumption! What extraordinary assumption? The extraordinary assumption that no money is of necessity required to enable the running of public transport services; I'm sorry if that wasn't sufficiently clear, although I've no idea how I could have made it more so! b. And, while you're about it, why not steal a plane, some fuel and a pilot and support staff that you can hold at gunpoint respectively to fly it and run the operation for no pay - as well, of course, as a decent hanger and some land on which to put it (best do this first, actually) - in order to prove your point! Not "gunpoint" for sure! The "point" to which I refer was, once again, the one in which you state that no money is required in order to put together and run a public transport service, be it Qantas, taxi cabs in Mumbai or the 49 bus in London (not that either of us has mentioned the latter two of these which, for the avoidance of doubt, I mention now for illustrative purposes only).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2013 4:48:19 GMT -5
Is this your assumption, ahinton?
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 13, 2013 6:22:46 GMT -5
Is this your assumption, ahinton? Is what my "assumption"? If by your question you mean do I merely assume that public transport cannot be provided without substantial outlays of money, then the answer is no, for I do not "assume" this but know it to be a provable fact; if indeed you meant something else, however, please advise!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2013 7:39:49 GMT -5
The extraordinary assumption that no money is of necessity required to enable the running of public transport services, ahinton!
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 13, 2013 7:44:14 GMT -5
The extraordinary assumption that no money is of necessity required to enable the running of public transport services, ahinton! Yes. That is what I wrote. Is there a particular reason for your repeating it as you do here? Just curious!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2013 7:46:11 GMT -5
Why do you make such an extraordinary assumption, ahinton?
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 13, 2013 8:23:25 GMT -5
Why do you make such an extraordinary assumption, ahinton? As what? That no public (or, for that matter, private) transport service can be provided without vast initial and equally vast ongoing investment of funds? I would have thought that obvious! Who would design vehicles without payment for doing so? From what sources could will the materials from which the vehicles are manufactured be obtained without payment by those acquiring them? Who would then do the manufacturing for free? Who would be able to have the end results marketed and sold without investing money in the former and receiving it for the latter? How would public transport service providers then run their services without making payments to all those involved in the provision of their services? (from administrators to timetable designers, marketing and PR staff, drivers &c.) and how would they procure all the fuel necessary without actually paying for it? Where would such providers derive their income in order to operate? Not always just the travelling public, for sure (just as a full concert hall with every audience member having paid a good price for his/her ticket will not ensure that the event breaks even, let alone makes a profit), but they have to get the income from somewhere otherwise they'd simply go bust. What's so "extraordinary" about any of that? - and why do you assume it to be a mere "assumption" on my part? Apologies for the repetititititive nature of the above, for which my sole excuse would appear to be the unwarranted difficulty that I appear to be having in getting through...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2013 8:40:18 GMT -5
Why do you assume anything, ahinton?
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Dec 13, 2013 9:42:44 GMT -5
Why do you assume anything, ahinton? Wrong question (at least here and in the present context, such as it is) since, as I have already made abundantly clear, I have "assumed" nothing and instead stated something based upon simle fact; a better question might perhaps therefore be "why do you continue to assume that I "assume" anything when it is so obvious that I do nothing of the kind?"... Anyway, never mind that; what about Qantas? (the subject of the thread, in case anyone's understandably forgotten that); might Virgin take it over so that Australia's national airline becomes British property and, if so, might that help on the contrary to encourage the hastening of Australia's long-mooted severance from Britain? What might the asset-strippers do first? And so on... www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/if-holden-didnt-make-it-what-chance-qantas-20131212-2z920.html...in which, despite its source (which some might be fogriven to thinking to be the Sydney Mourning Herald), readers will note the following ad: "Fly With Singapore Air flightcentre.co.uk/Singapore-Air Cheap First & Business Class Deals With Flight Centre™. Get A Quote!" www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/virgins-capital-success-irks-qantas/story-e6frg95x-1226781847143#from The Australian seems to give yet more of a flavour of what's going on and what the future might be for those who pick up Qantas's scraps after the private equity / private capital guys and gals have had a go at what might remain of it after Virgin and the rest have finished putting their oar in (sorry - bad metaphor!) - if indeed they ever do. Qantatative easing, anyone?...
|
|