Coalition government: Transport Secretary Philip Hammond ends Labour's 'war on motorists'
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Restaurant damaged by car.
Next: Coalition government: Transport Secretary Philip Hammond ends Labour's 'war on motorists'
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 21 May 2010 04:20 On Thu, 20 May 2010 23:54:31 +0100, Dave Plowman <dave(a)davesound.co.uk> wrote: >There's no real reason they have to be 'out >> > of town'. > >> Not everyone has such a time-free life as you, popping over to >> supermarket every couple of days for 1 'carry's worth of food? I >> certainly don't. I like to go once a week or once a fortnight and stock >> up on the heavy things, then carry it home in the boot of my car. Time >> saved, which can be spent with my family and friends. > >Fine for you. I prefer to eat fresh food. all very nice if its practical. for most it isn't. Supermarkets do not need to be "out of town", equally you cannot expect them to be near enough to everybody to permit daily shopping, its just not realistic. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 21 May 2010 04:31 On Thu, 20 May 2010 18:05:48 +0100, "mileburner" <mileburner(a)btinternet.com> wrote: >> Somebody I argued with about airtravel told me the carbon cost was >> zero for him because he is travelling in the 20% of seats otherwise >> empty and "the plane was going anyway". This is of course (rather >> pathetic) self deception, you can get it from car haters, car lovers >> and all other points of view. > >Ah yes good old self-deception... > >"I *have* to drive, there is no other way of getting there". another car hater had a long term argument with me over that, in the end he killfiled me rather than see he was wrong. If your interests lie outside of cities, its often literally true and more often practically true that car is the only sensible choice. PT works well with large volumes of people going to the same place, for the most popular pastimes in the UK, walking, fishing, birdwatching, field sports etc not using a car is masochism. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 21 May 2010 04:34 On Thu, 20 May 2010 18:17:15 +0100, "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >However, how do we account for >those who spend time installing children into their special seats, driving a >few hundred yards to school, spend more time removing said children from the >car and driving home again when it would be quicker and less effort to walk. I think they are the irrational ones whom the press terrified over pedophiles and therefore the danger of letting kids out alone. Some are so irrationally terrified they cannot respond to the data that the car journey is statistically more dangerous than the risk of abduction, with a logical response (saying that stating the above simple fact is an "obscenity". weird but true) Some people do not do logic. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: ChelseaTractorMan on 21 May 2010 04:37 On Thu, 20 May 2010 18:55:17 +0100, "The Medway Handyman" <davidlang(a)no-spam-blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >> You often see lots of expensive cars on council estates... > >Daily Mail overdose obviously. LOL, my experience of council estates is one or two BMWs owned by drug dealers and a few expensive commuter cars paying for residents parking spaces to an OAP resident. -- Mike. .. . Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.
From: Derek C on 21 May 2010 04:50
On 21 May, 09:08, Squashme <squas...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 May, 08:59, Derek C <del.copel...(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > On 20 May, 17:01, ChelseaTractorMan <mr.c.trac...(a)hotmail.co.uk> > > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 20 May 2010 16:50:03 +0100, "mileburner" > > > > <milebur...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > > > >But it does seem to be the thickos who insist on driving everywhere. One of > > > >them said to me a while ago, "I drive everywhere otherwise people will think > > > >I am poor". Yet she often does not have the money for fuel. I hope this > > > >illustrates the type of person I mean. > > > > which probably represents a small % of people, most drive because its > > > convenient, quicker, private, easy to carry loads, gets to places with > > > no PT etc etc. > > > Somebody I argued with about airtravel told me the carbon cost was > > > zero for him because he is travelling in the 20% of seats otherwise > > > empty and "the plane was going anyway". This is of course (rather > > > pathetic) self deception, you can get it from car haters, car lovers > > > and all other points of view. > > > -- > > > I only use my car for the journeys I need to make, and at the times I > > need to make them. > > > Apart from in the rush hour, large engined, multi-seater buses and > > trains trundle around the countryside all day with only about three > > old age pensioners with bus passes and a couple of school age children > > on board. Is that really so green? > > > I do ride a bicycle, but only to keep fit and to enjoy the > > countryside. I might commute to work on it if the journey was less > > than about 5 miles and it's not pouring with rain. Unfortunately I > > have not had a job that close to my home for years. My last job was 16 > > miles away via two motorways, or 18 miles by the back roads. That took > > about about 25 minutes each way by car, two hours by a bus service > > that meanderers through every housing estate in the county, and I > > would guess about an hour and a half by bike, after which I would be > > too knackered to do much work. > > > Derek C > > Yes, of course, when our grandparents and grandparents were alive, > very few of them ever managed to get to work. The distances were just > too huge. Thank God we had an empire!- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - When my grandparents and great-grandparents (I assume that is what your meant) were alive, most people worked for small and medium sized family run businesses in their local areas, often within walking distance of their homes. These have unfortunately been taken over, or forced out of business, by soul-less multi-national companies who are only interested in the bottom line and getting the cheapest possibly labour forces. Most working class families lived in rented accomodation in those days, so if they had to move to another area to find work, they just moved to another rented property. Most people own their own houses these days, so if you have to move to another area, you get stung for estate agents and soliticitors fees, not to mention giving the Treasury several thousand pounds in stamp duty (not a tax!), if you buy a similar sized house. In the London area even quite modest homes are above the stamp duty threshold. You are stuffed either way, moving house by stamp duty, and commuting by fuel duty and VAT. The only winner is the taxman. Derek C |