Search results

Deleted

Deleted

Deleted

Deleted

Deleted

Deleted

It's not a nonsensical argument at all! It is a proven fact that London gets more investment than the rest of the country. And I'm not talking solely about transport here. It gets more investment per head than anywhere else in the country, for everything! Something like 24 times more investment...

Thanks, I did indeed miss that. It still doesn't explain why the rest of the country gets the cast off's though, which is the whole point of this thread. I'm as guilty as anyone for leading it astray, but it is still the main point. Why is the rest of the country treated as secondary to London?

All of which rather neatly proves my point that we live in a London-centric country! It seems the rest of the Uk can go hang, as long as good old London gets its investment! None of the above goes anyway to explaining why London and the South seem to get the best of everything before the rest...

Utter rubbish. So if all the commuter services into Manchester were withdrawn, the city would carry on as normal? Or Leeds, or Liverpool or Cardiff? Believe it or not, the rest of the Uk does actually contribute to the well-being of the country! It isn't all about London. Plenty of big...

I'm sorry, I'm merely presenting the facts that investment in London far outweighs the rest of the country and always has done. With reference to your claim that no one uses trains/trams in Sheffield, then that may very well be the case. I've never commuted in Sheffield, so I can't say either...

Yes we do.. https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/news/nr/speri-london-infrastructure-bias-1.499052

Because we live in a London-centric country.

Deleted

Deleted

Deleted

Deleted

Twenty two pages in and we're still arguing the same points.

Deleted

Deleted