Bristol pay-as-you-go bike pilot scrapped
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: tim.... on 29 May 2010 06:19 "JNugent" <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote in message news:UsudnU_H8d4MeZ3RnZ2dnUVZ8v-dnZ2d(a)pipex.net... > tim.... wrote: > >> "JNugent" <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote: >>> DavidR wrote: >>>> "JNugent" <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote > >>>>> Do users pay the entire cost, or is there a significant subsidy from >>>>> people deriving no benefit from it? > >>>> When I pay my taxes to use a car, I consider VFM to be related to the >>>> amount of road I get. In order to get an extra 20 feet of road it is >>>> preferable to give someone a pound not to use it than to spend 10 >>>> pounds making more road. > >>> And? >>> Are you *really* claiming (or trying to) that road-users should be >>> subsidised? > >> No. He's claiming that NON road users should be subsidised. > > What - the bikes were not allowed on the highway anyway? They do not (usually) compromise the space need for a car. >> Theoretically this makes good sense. Whether it works in practice is >> another matter. > > Amen to your last musing above. > > If the Hertz bikes weren't intended for use on the road, one wonders what > practical use they could have been. > >> Though the real problem is convincing people that it is the right thing >> to do. Most people don't see subsidises of non road uses as being of >> benefit to road users and think that it is just a subsidising someone >> else's journey to work whilst they pay the full cost, which isn't >> necessarily true. > > It is *self-evidently* true. > > Some may try to argue that it is in my interest to have my pocket picked > in order to benefit others, but I - like most people - am resistant to > such blandishments. So if by, say, taking a pound out of your pocket to persuade other not use a road, you save 1.50 in fuel costs because your journey is less congested, you would still rather use the money to buy fuel because you get to use the item being purchased rather than it benefiting an anonymous individual. Is that right? tim
From: JNugent on 29 May 2010 06:21 tim.... wrote: > "JNugent" <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote in message > news:UsudnU_H8d4MeZ3RnZ2dnUVZ8v-dnZ2d(a)pipex.net... >> tim.... wrote: >> >>> "JNugent" <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote: >>>> DavidR wrote: >>>>> "JNugent" <JN(a)noparticularplacetogo.com> wrote >>>>>> Do users pay the entire cost, or is there a significant subsidy from >>>>>> people deriving no benefit from it? >>>>> When I pay my taxes to use a car, I consider VFM to be related to the >>>>> amount of road I get. In order to get an extra 20 feet of road it is >>>>> preferable to give someone a pound not to use it than to spend 10 >>>>> pounds making more road. >>>> And? >>>> Are you *really* claiming (or trying to) that road-users should be >>>> subsidised? >>> No. He's claiming that NON road users should be subsidised. >> What - the bikes were not allowed on the highway anyway? > > They do not (usually) compromise the space need for a car. > >>> Theoretically this makes good sense. Whether it works in practice is >>> another matter. >> Amen to your last musing above. >> >> If the Hertz bikes weren't intended for use on the road, one wonders what >> practical use they could have been. >> >>> Though the real problem is convincing people that it is the right thing >>> to do. Most people don't see subsidises of non road uses as being of >>> benefit to road users and think that it is just a subsidising someone >>> else's journey to work whilst they pay the full cost, which isn't >>> necessarily true. >> It is *self-evidently* true. >> >> Some may try to argue that it is in my interest to have my pocket picked >> in order to benefit others, but I - like most people - am resistant to >> such blandishments. > > So if by, say, taking a pound out of your pocket to persuade other not use a > road, you save 1.50 in fuel costs because your journey is less congested, > you would still rather use the money to buy fuel because you get to use the > item being purchased rather than it benefiting an anonymous individual. Is > that right? No, it isn't right. It's clear nonsense. Try to fabricate a less-unbelievable scenario.
From: Rob on 29 May 2010 07:58 Tosspot wrote: || On 28/05/10 23:39, The Medway Handyman wrote: ||| JNugent wrote: |||| Tosspot wrote: ||||| On 28/05/10 15:32, bugbear wrote: |||||| JMS wrote: ||||||| http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/8702011.stm ||||||| ||||||| Oh dear - I wonder if Boris's scheme will go the same way? ||||||| ||||||| ||||||| ||||||| I wonder if the newcomers to cycling in a city found it too ||||||| dangerous? |||||| I wonder if the rents were too high, or the |||||| funding ran out? ||||| ||||| Well, if Moody had actually read the article, well I'll help, ||||| here's the relevant bit... ||||| ||||| "Hourbike said more funding was needed" ||||| ||||| Although, as usual, it works fine in Germany, you find a bike, ||||| call a number on your mobile, it automagically unlocks and off ||||| you go. When you finish, you lock it again, and it's debited to ||||| your mobile account. |||| |||| Do users pay the entire cost, or is there a significant subsidy |||| from people deriving no benefit from it? ||| ||| You mean like the subsidy Road Tax provides for cycle lanes etc? || || What's this Road Tax you're on about? The extra tax some people have to pay for permission to use their vehicles on public roads. Surely you must have heard of it ? -- Rob
From: Tosspot on 29 May 2010 08:11 On 29/05/10 12:58, Rob wrote: > Tosspot wrote: > || On 28/05/10 23:39, The Medway Handyman wrote: > ||| JNugent wrote: > |||| Tosspot wrote: > ||||| On 28/05/10 15:32, bugbear wrote: > |||||| JMS wrote: > ||||||| http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/8702011.stm > ||||||| > ||||||| Oh dear - I wonder if Boris's scheme will go the same way? > ||||||| > ||||||| > ||||||| > ||||||| I wonder if the newcomers to cycling in a city found it too > ||||||| dangerous? > |||||| I wonder if the rents were too high, or the > |||||| funding ran out? > ||||| > ||||| Well, if Moody had actually read the article, well I'll help, > ||||| here's the relevant bit... > ||||| > ||||| "Hourbike said more funding was needed" > ||||| > ||||| Although, as usual, it works fine in Germany, you find a bike, > ||||| call a number on your mobile, it automagically unlocks and off > ||||| you go. When you finish, you lock it again, and it's debited to > ||||| your mobile account. > |||| > |||| Do users pay the entire cost, or is there a significant subsidy > |||| from people deriving no benefit from it? > ||| > ||| You mean like the subsidy Road Tax provides for cycle lanes etc? > || > || What's this Road Tax you're on about? > > The extra tax some people have to pay for permission to use their vehicles > on public roads. Surely you must have heard of it ? No, sorry, could you provide a link?
From: The Medway Handyman on 29 May 2010 08:31
Rob wrote: > Tosspot wrote: >>> On 28/05/10 23:39, The Medway Handyman wrote: >>>> JNugent wrote: >>>>> Tosspot wrote: >>>>>> On 28/05/10 15:32, bugbear wrote: >>>>>>> JMS wrote: >>>>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/8702011.stm >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Oh dear - I wonder if Boris's scheme will go the same way? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I wonder if the newcomers to cycling in a city found it too >>>>>>>> dangerous? >>>>>>> I wonder if the rents were too high, or the >>>>>>> funding ran out? >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, if Moody had actually read the article, well I'll help, >>>>>> here's the relevant bit... >>>>>> >>>>>> "Hourbike said more funding was needed" >>>>>> >>>>>> Although, as usual, it works fine in Germany, you find a bike, >>>>>> call a number on your mobile, it automagically unlocks and off >>>>>> you go. When you finish, you lock it again, and it's debited to >>>>>> your mobile account. >>>>> >>>>> Do users pay the entire cost, or is there a significant subsidy >>>>> from people deriving no benefit from it? >>>> >>>> You mean like the subsidy Road Tax provides for cycle lanes etc? >>> >>> What's this Road Tax you're on about? > > The extra tax some people have to pay for permission to use their > vehicles on public roads. Surely you must have heard of it ? Cyclists don't like the phrase, it reminds them that they are sponging freeloaders. -- Dave - The Tax Paying Motorist -- Q. Why don't they put pockets in lycra cycling shorts? A. Because cyclists never put their hands in their pockets. |