Just got fined! What’s the point apart from money making?
Discussion
Slippydiff said:
...
“When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life; for there is in London all that life can afford.”
^ This is utter BS.
It should read :
When a man is tired of London, he’s sick of being taken for a c**t by TSL.
You're just showing your age “When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life; for there is in London all that life can afford.”
^ This is utter BS.
It should read :
When a man is tired of London, he’s sick of being taken for a c**t by TSL.
. In your 20s/30s you would have been a bit more adaptable.The congestion charge has been around for 20 years. There are only 2 relatively recent changes to driving in London - a lot of rat runs have been closed off and a lot of bus lanes have become 24/7. So it's harder to avoid the main routes and people need to stick to what Google Maps is telling them.
braddo said:
Slippydiff said:
...
“When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life; for there is in London all that life can afford.”
^ This is utter BS.
It should read :
When a man is tired of London, he’s sick of being taken for a c**t by TSL.
You're just showing your age “When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life; for there is in London all that life can afford.”
^ This is utter BS.
It should read :
When a man is tired of London, he’s sick of being taken for a c**t by TSL.
. In your 20s/30s you would have been a bit more adaptable.The congestion charge has been around for 20 years. There are only 2 relatively recent changes to driving in London - a lot of rat runs have been closed off and a lot of bus lanes have become 24/7. So it's harder to avoid the main routes and people need to stick to what Google Maps is telling them.
Griffith4ever said:
Sorry I mentioned the glaring truth. If that makes me "daily mail", so be it.
...
If you dont' think Muslim voters are having a big influence in British politics then you need to take another look.
Insidious racism. ...
If you dont' think Muslim voters are having a big influence in British politics then you need to take another look.
As mentioned already, Muslims are 15% of London's population and 6.5% of the national population. Your only problem with Khan (other than him being a Muslim, it seems) is related to car use. Muslims drive cars too, you know.
Griffith4ever said:
If you dont' think Muslim voters are having a big influence in British politics then you need to take another look.
The Tories putting up a complete and utter halfwit to stand against Khan probably had a bigger impact on the result than 15% of the London residents being Muslim voters. LunarOne said:
I guess you're not aware of the twentyisation of London's roads? Before you could drive at a normal pace and you were slowed by traffic. Now traffic is holding up snails.
I'm very much aware of it. There are some main roads and times of day where the 20mph limit feels frustrating, but for many many other roads the lower limit has very little impact on journey times.
braddo said:
LunarOne said:
I guess you're not aware of the twentyisation of London's roads? Before you could drive at a normal pace and you were slowed by traffic. Now traffic is holding up snails.
I'm very much aware of it. There are some main roads and times of day where the 20mph limit feels frustrating, but for many many other roads the lower limit has very little impact on journey times.
braddo said:
You're just showing your age . In your 20s/30s you would have been a bit more adaptable.
The congestion charge has been around for 20 years. There are only 2 relatively recent changes to driving in London - a lot of rat runs have been closed off and a lot of bus lanes have become 24/7. So it's harder to avoid the main routes and people need to stick to what Google Maps is telling them.
I didn't live in London in my 20's/30's . In your 20s/30s you would have been a bit more adaptable.The congestion charge has been around for 20 years. There are only 2 relatively recent changes to driving in London - a lot of rat runs have been closed off and a lot of bus lanes have become 24/7. So it's harder to avoid the main routes and people need to stick to what Google Maps is telling them.
and rest assured had I done so, I wasn't particularly "adaptable" then, and I sure as hell am not anymore adaptable now.I did however regrettably live in N.London for a couple of years four years ago (just as TfL was expanding it's stealth taxation system to encompass increasing amounts of vehicle owners/drivers who lived outside the then existing ULEZ zone)
If those purporting to want to improve the air quality in central London were serious about doing so, they'd ban the worst polluting cars, but they don't, they use them as way to raise revenue. Hence my comment about a man who's tired of London is tired of being taken for a CU Next tuesday
megaphone said:
So what's the point of a 20mph limit? They're just put in place as vanity projects to appease the residents, and on ideological grounds. The fact they cost millions to introduce and blight the street scene with expensive signage doesn't matter.
Less accelerating and braking compared to a 30mph limit, which helps lower emissions and noise. Safer for pedestrians and cyclists, and less severe car accidents.braddo said:
Less accelerating and braking compared to a 30mph limit, which helps lower emissions and noise. Safer for pedestrians and cyclists, and less severe car accidents.
Wales has shown that line of argument is false. The recent government study showed emissions don't drop, engines are running more inefficiently and all the 20mph zones have done is ensure cars spend longer in each area.Slippydiff said:
If those purporting to want to improve the air quality in central London were serious about doing so, they'd ban the worst polluting cars, but they don't, they use them as way to raise revenue. Hence my comment about a man who's tired of London is tired of being taken for a CU Next tuesday
Nope. The idea of the £12.50 charge for non compliant cars is to drive a change of behaviour, and to encourage people to buy compliant cars. This is always the way. We don't ban high CO2 cars, we increase taxes so people won't buy them. We don't force people to have electic company cars, we introduce a BIK tax system that pushes them down that route. We don't force people to have a private pension, we give them tax breaks for encourage them. If TFL had banned non compliant cars, there would have been uproar. So they didn't, they just put in place a tax to encourage people into compliant cars. Absolutely normal, and the right way to go about it.
CLK-GTR said:
braddo said:
Less accelerating and braking compared to a 30mph limit, which helps lower emissions and noise. Safer for pedestrians and cyclists, and less severe car accidents.
Wales has shown that line of argument is false. The recent government study showed emissions don't drop, engines are running more inefficiently and all the 20mph zones have done is ensure cars spend longer in each area.braddo said:
Now, do you really think an entire country with 3 million people and a city of 9 million are comparable? No-one is chugging about in dirty old manual diesels in London. Far more time is spent in London slowing, accelerating or being stationary than travelling at a constant speed, so engine efficiency at a given constant speed is only one component of the emissions pie (brakes, tyres, accelerating to a higher terminal speed).
I don't know, neither do you, but what you posted is exactly the argument the Welsh Government used for the 20mph limit and its proven to be wrong.CLK-GTR said:
braddo said:
Now, do you really think an entire country with 3 million people and a city of 9 million are comparable?
I don't know, neither do you, but what you posted is exactly the argument the Welsh Government used for the 20mph limit and its proven to be wrong.1 Density of population and traffic are exponentially higher in greater London. The Welsh monitoring is at only 43 locations across the whole country
2 In the Welsh monitoring "All roads were largely free from physical restrictions that reduce traffic speeds at the time of monitoring." Whereas London is filled with traffic lights and speed bumps.
CO2 hasn't been measured in the Welsh reports because of the small monitoring area and short timescales.
https://tfw.wales/default-20mph-speed-limit-on-res...
This idea that 20mph causes more pollution than 30mph in cities is ridiculous. In the countryside? Maybe there's a really tiny increase. But anyway, the 20mph isn't all about emissions.
braddo said:
megaphone said:
So what's the point of a 20mph limit? They're just put in place as vanity projects to appease the residents, and on ideological grounds. The fact they cost millions to introduce and blight the street scene with expensive signage doesn't matter.
Less accelerating and braking compared to a 30mph limit, which helps lower emissions and noise. Safer for pedestrians and cyclists, and less severe car accidents.
ks don't you? TwigtheWonderkid said:
Slippydiff said:
If those purporting to want to improve the air quality in central London were serious about doing so, they'd ban the worst polluting cars, but they don't, they use them as way to raise revenue. Hence my comment about a man who's tired of London is tired of being taken for a CU Next tuesday
Nope. The idea of the £12.50 charge for non compliant cars is to drive a change of behaviour, and to encourage people to buy compliant cars. This is always the way. We don't ban high CO2 cars, we increase taxes so people won't buy them. We don't force people to have electic company cars, we introduce a BIK tax system that pushes them down that route. We don't force people to have a private pension, we give them tax breaks for encourage them. If TFL had banned non compliant cars, there would have been uproar. So they didn't, they just put in place a tax to encourage people into compliant cars. Absolutely normal, and the right way to go about it.
As I stated (and you've concurred) it's nothing more than a fund raising tax levied on those unable to afford an EV or a compliant vehicle.
Keep using your non-compliant car because you can't afford a compliant vehicle, and we'll keep fining/taxing you.
And to those who can afford a compliant vehicle, but choose to drive around in a gas guzzling, non-compliant car, you can carry on doing so, and we'll continue to fine/tax you too.
So basically zero f
ks given about improving air quality and all about raising revenue. End of.megaphone said:
braddo said:
megaphone said:
So what's the point of a 20mph limit? They're just put in place as vanity projects to appease the residents, and on ideological grounds. The fact they cost millions to introduce and blight the street scene with expensive signage doesn't matter.
Less accelerating and braking compared to a 30mph limit, which helps lower emissions and noise. Safer for pedestrians and cyclists, and less severe car accidents.ks don't you? Slippydiff said:
As I stated (and you've concurred) it's nothing more than a fund raising tax levied on those unable to afford an EV or a compliant vehicle.
Who can't afford a compliant car? Any petrol car from 2006 and many more older than that. A compliant car can be picked up for a few hundred quid. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff