EU RANT Very boat related.

[abraxus]

Re: In line

I accept what you're saying but I don't think it applies here because Ryannair are a budget airline that provide a no frills service. If someone wants or needs the frills, then they should pay for them or use a carrier that builds them in. For those that don't need the extras there should be a choice available.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re:I think Mr Blair

and the EU and the pressure groups that drive the world might not accept your definition of "a frill".

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[abraxus]

Re:I think Mr Blair

I'm pretty sure they don't unfortunately.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ashley]

Ignoring the political side of this. I've just read the second story linked to the BBC web site;

It [Stansted] said Ryanair was the only airline to pass the cost of hiring wheelchairs from the airport services company on to the passenger.
But a Ryanair spokesman said: "We fly to 86 airports and at 80 of them wheelchairs are provided free of charge."

So as mentioned earlier, other airlines include the cost of purchasing wheelchairs and amortise it across their airfares. That's fair enough.
But hang-on, Ryanair flew 28m passengers last year and expect even more this year and are charging £4.46 per passenger. So they estimate the cost of supplying wheelchairs to the six remaining airports to be £125.4 million pounds per year EVERY YEAR!
We await the next legal problem Ryanir come up with to add costs to their ticket


<hr width=100% size=1>A truly wise man never plays leapfrog with a Unicorn

 

[Sea Devil]

Re: In line

I do find that Ryan air appear to be a little economical with the truth.

recently needed to fly to UK and on the web site the tickets were £1 or something really silly - fine booked them but found there was a further £15 in airport charges and tax. Fine - still an amazing deal - then had to book another of exactly the same at a cost of £60 but the airport charges and tax dropped to around £10?

Now I wonder...... Still a good deal but?

<hr width=100% size=1>If you have time please visit my web site -
<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.michaelbriant.com/sailing>http://www.michaelbriant.com/sailing</A>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Nice work if you can get it

This is a very widely used business manouver. Construction companies are famous for it. Tender at cost or even less and then load up any justifiable extra you can.

To arrive at the cost you've calculated Ryanair must be buying their wheel chairs on a US defence contract from Boeing.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ShipsWoofy]

My word you are on a loser here.

What a charming point of view you have, I hope you never need help from society cos on that day you might become a hypocrite as well as a fascist.

In answer to your question, although I don't know why! Why should a disabled 'customer' pay extra to receive the same service, because they might need assistance checking in at an airport is not the same thing. The service is leaving Luton and landing in Nice for example.

This is hardly the same as your carrying excess weight in your suitcase, you can just take stuff out. You have a choice. A disabled traveller, unlike Jesus, cannot just get up and walk to avoid surcharges to their travel. Maybe they should not be allowed to travel, or other luxuries such as eating out, shopping, theatre.

They should all stay at home or drive around in their little three wheeler cars.

On another note, do you have children. I don't, yet I have to pay for family tax credits etc etc. why? because this is the society most of us choice to live in, one were no particular element of society is discriminated against.

p.s. I think you should have thought a little more carefully about operation Barbarossa, you were doing OK. up to that point.


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.topcatsail.co.uk>New and updated website</A>

 

[abraxus]

I don't think I am on a loser and am fed up with people trying to make others feel guilty just because they don't continually wish to put their hands in their pockets whenever someone asks.

Of course those with disabilities should be able to travel and should also be able to do so with paid for assistance. This is available on virtually every other airline and is subsidised by the other passengers, so why on earth do they have to travel on Ryannair, which is set up as a no frills service, for the benefit of those that require no frills but wish to pay the lowest cost possible.

A diasabled traveller also has a choice, he she can choose an all encompassing service that caters for everyone's needs such as virtually every other airline.

I know I sound callous, but I already pay more than half of what I earn before I even start to pay for those less able, those with less money and those with less choice. With what I am generously left for myself I then watch about a third of this taken from me in vat, petrol, alcohol and tobabcco duty. If I save any of what's left, another hand comes reaching out to grab some more of that.

I then see this indiscriminately given out to people with varying circumstances whether they need it or not. Child allowances and credits and tax breaks are given to families who may have more money than me. Subsidies and assistance like the one above are given to those less able even though they may be millionaires, and countless other examples where this is wasted.

It's neither unrealistic nor fascistic to ask that with the 20% or so that I'm left with out of my earnings, that I be allowed to spend it on myself, without once again being asked to give up more of it for someone or something else.

Society does discriminate, it discriminates against those that have more than the next man, both in financial terms and penalties and more insidiously in the increasing amount amount of snide smugness in the way that guilt is heaped upon those that are not only paying more than their fair share, but who are then criticised and abused when they begin to question it.

I will not feel guilty for the times when I say enough is enough. I do more than my fair share. I have choices and rights too, and whilst I may have little control over what is taken from me and how it's used, I have every right to speak up if I'm unhappy about it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mikewilkes]

<:With what I am generously left for myself I then watch about a third of this taken from me in vat, petrol, alcohol and tobabcco duty:>

You also have a choice - you dont HAVE to drink or smoke !!!

<:It's neither unrealistic nor fascistic to ask that with the 20% or so that I'm left with out of my earnings:>

If you are only left with 20% out of your earnings then I guess its time you employed an accountant. You are actually infering that the other 80% goes in taxes of one form or another.



<hr width=100% size=1>

Ceum ur

 

[abraxus]

Mike

Whilst income tax and nat ins only account for 50%, there is also vat and other taxes that are imposed on us.

Yes I do have a choice and I choose to drink and smoke in the same way that people choose to fly on aeroplanes.

It is calculated that a 40% tax payer who drives, drinks and smokes (not simultaneously ) and has modest savings, pays anywhere between 75% and 85% in taxes in total.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mikewilkes]

Taxation rates ???

Forgive me for being thick but I have been away from the UK for quite a while now. I therefore went on the Inland Revenue's site and got the following info.

Base rate seems to be 22 % and NIC contirbutions 11%. That is 33% in my book. That of course is discounting the fact that the first 4,745 is tax free and the first 2020 is at a lowly rate of 10 %. If I have time later I will work out the %. But it is certainly going to be a lot less than 50% you claim.
As for the top rate of 40% then as for as I can gleam for the info given the rate of NIC is only 1% making a total of 41%.
I bet there a lot of disabled people who would love to earn enough to pay 41% in taxes.




<hr width=100% size=1>

Ceum ur

 

[mikewilkes]

Re: Taxation rates ???

Sad person that I am , I decided to work this out before I went for my lunch.

Before getting to the higher rate threshold you are paying 26.776% in tax and nic. After that you are paying 41%.

Kind of strikes me as a wee bit different to your figures ???

<font color=blue>Apologies for seemingly hijacking Andy's thread on Ryanair<font color=blue> /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>

Ceum ur

 

[abraxus]

Re: Taxation rates ???

Mike, your figures are broadly correct, with the total take from a 40% tax payer being around 40% by tim you've taken into account the allowances and nat insurances.

It's vat, duty on other goods (fags, booxe & fuel etc), tax on savings & insurance, council tax, road tax, stamp duty etc that all add to the total.

Actually you don't have to be earning that much to reach the 40% level and you'd be surprised at how little you're left with, especially when you think you started with almost double that.

Of course there are a lot of disabled that would love to earn enough to pay 41% in taxes, but what has that got to do with it? I'm sure there are a lot of unemployed that would love a boat, but does that mean you should give them 40% of yours?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[DavidofMersea]

Re: A mobility Car

I wonder if Andy Wilson has a mobility car, and is the car parking free at the airport?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[IanPoole2]

Re: Nice work if you can get it

Cost creep is an absolute con.

If someone advertises £1 fare - then all you should pay is £1. I'm fed up with ordering goods then VAT being slapped on, book a ticket and then a booking fee being added.

Companies that do that should be boycotted, or their directors hounded out of the country. Their no worse than the doorstep cowboys & con-men, these comanies include Ryan Air, Ticketmaster - even PC World used to-do it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mikewilkes]

Re: Taxation rates ???

GBP 36,145 pa. GBP 695 pw. GBP 17.375 ph.

Not an insignificant amount of dosh I would say!!!

Bearing in mind you choose to live there. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>

Ceum ur

 

[abraxus]

Re: Taxation rates ???

Whether it's a significant amount or not is relative. Besides no-one gets to keep it all, so not sure what the point is.

Actually I live here by accident of birth, and up until recently have been very happy with that accident. As time passes I feel less happy and am planning to leave. There was a time when I may have been saddened by this, but am actually very happy and excited by the prospect.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[andy_wilson]

Re: A mobility Car

Sadly no mobility car.

I have a number of disabilities that I do my best to work around within the means I can generate for myself.

I know a number of people in wheelchairs who do the same.

It's important to remember that it was actually BAA at Stanstead that were charging the £18 to assist the disabled passenger, but Ryan Air copped for the flack because they had the contract with the passenger. Having seen that Ryan Air originaly thought 50p per journey should cover this, that's 50p per passenger carried via EVERY airport - to cover what costs £18 to provide at just 2 or three airports who make the charge - the charge has now leapt to £2.23 per journey.

Closer inspection of the booking web pages reveals that they will only carry a maximum of 4 wheelchair bound passengers per flight. Lets face it, you see the odd one ON a flight, and you see the odd other one needing assistance through the airport, but I've never seen 4 on a flight, not even coming back from Skiing!!

So, max 4 X £18 per flight COST at just a few of the airports they operate from, but typically £250 additional REVENUE from EVERY flight at EVERY airport they operate from.

I'm all for giving disabled people equal access.

I don't mind sharing a fair portion of the cost.

I object to them advertising one price, them using this issue as an excuse to jack up their revenue.

As Ryan Air customer services are starting to learn.

Yer' know what though. If they put on the booking form 'EU/PC/crap directive fighting fund surcharge I would give them the respect they deserve and pay it with glee.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re:I\'d have thought

If its practicable to level the playing field for the disabled, thus enabling them to join in the economic and social whirl we call society, then thats a positive thing.

I can think of worse ways to spend my dosh. If a company is taking advantage of the disabled to chisel more profit out of customers then they deserve sorting out.

The decision is who's taking advantage. Someone who parades what their doing or someone who sneeks it in on the sly.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[abraxus]

Re:I\'d have thought

I agree with all of that Peppermint.

<hr width=100% size=1>