"Motorists have ruined England"

[Pan Pan]

DonkeyApple said:

Pan Pan said:

Computers and the internet don't actually make anything, for that you need real people, real materials, doing real physical work, to produce real items and goods...somewhere.

That's a personal view rather than a factual one. But it doesn't belay the simple fact that the service sector is the dominant sector in the UK. It is also London centric. And hence the glorious congestion of the SE.

Look in any traffic jam in the UK, those people are traveling from a dormitory town to a remote office complex or from the dormitory town to the remote shopping complex. Very few of them are off to do manual labour in statistical terms. The people in manufacturing are too small a group to be the cause of the issue and not can such work be broken down and regionalised any more than it is already (just look at how a car is assembled and all the parts coming in from smaller, regional entities). If anything it proves the point rather.

Strangely even the computers we are using now, were made by real people using real components, and materials, made from real materials that were transported from real sources somwhere, by real vehicles just like the materials and components used for the buildings we live in, and the transport systems we use. Computers are fine but without rel people doing real (physical) work somewhere they and all the procese that realy on them, would simply not even exist. Someone somewhere has to do some real work for computers to exist, and for them to have the power to operate and the environment in which they can operate. this all takes some real work done by real people somewhere.

[Clivey]

DonkeyApple said:

But poor residuals are surely a symptom of easy credit?

Of course - that's why I said "on a related note". What I meant was that if cars were looked-after and held their value, Joe Average wouldn't feel the "need" to change theirs every 3 years (or whenever theirs needed a service / tyres / brakes etc.).

[k-ink]

Of course there are some HGVs on the roads at night. My point was that by comparison the roads at night are pretty much empty compared to the day time. You are not reguarly nose to tail in stationary traffic for miles at a time at night on normal motorway routes (proximity to ports or dartford aside). You are free to put your foot down and make very good progress indeed. Which is precisely why I travel at night if I have to use the motorways.

So any measures which reduce the daytime traffic and increase the night time traffic will have clear benefits all round. Clearly most people in private cars going to work at regular office hours will want to travel during the day. But there are some journeys which are not 100% necessary to be done during the day. I would say any deliveries to major companies should only be done at night. Pay people more to work at night. These sort of premises are already staffed by security 24/7 anyway. That way there would be next to no lorries on the motorways during the day, aside from the absolutely essential. This can only help matters. No I am not just blaming HGVs! This was purely one example of an easy improvement.

Next up why not start staggered office working times? It will not work for some people. However it would be fine for others. I used to be allowed to try various start times at my old office, ranging from 7am to 10.30am. Then after my normal days hours I'd go home, either early or late. This avoided the rush hour/s chaos at both ends of the day, saving me many hours a week. Many others could do this if the companies were flexible enough.

Another easy change - make undertaking legal. That way we use three to four lanes evenly. Rather than one manic lane and all the rest barely at 10% capacity. This is utter madness alone. This could be changed over night at zero cost.

I have also tried various other ways of getting to work with less hassles than driving. At one time I drove into London (circa 1995-98) but the traffic of course was madness. So I switched to trains which made life a lot easier. Just sleep all the way to work. I have also tried living in london, walking to work, or riding my bike across town. However these days I work from home in surrey 100% - ever since broad band was invented actually. I'd say most people in London could do the same if only their companies were flexible.

People will only generally change if companies make it easy to do so. Which probably means the companies need to be given incentives.

[DonkeyApple]

Pan Pan said:

DonkeyApple said:

Pan Pan said:

Computers and the internet don't actually make anything, for that you need real people, real materials, doing real physical work, to produce real items and goods...somewhere.

That's a personal view rather than a factual one. But it doesn't belay the simple fact that the service sector is the dominant sector in the UK. It is also London centric. And hence the glorious congestion of the SE.

Look in any traffic jam in the UK, those people are traveling from a dormitory town to a remote office complex or from the dormitory town to the remote shopping complex. Very few of them are off to do manual labour in statistical terms. The people in manufacturing are too small a group to be the cause of the issue and not can such work be broken down and regionalised any more than it is already (just look at how a car is assembled and all the parts coming in from smaller, regional entities). If anything it proves the point rather.

Strangely even the computers we are using now, were made by real people using real components, and materials, made from real materials that were transported from real sources somwhere, by real vehicles just like the materials and components used for the buildings we live in, and the transport systems we use. Computers are fine but without rel people doing real (physical) work somewhere they and all the procese that realy on them, would simply not even exist. Someone somewhere has to do some real work for computers to exist, and for them to have the power to operate and the environment in which they can operate. this all takes some real work done by real people somewhere.

So what? WE are a service sector economy now. What do you think has the best chance of re-distributing traffic, shifting existing service sector work to the regions or starting from scratch to take on SE Asia in making computers? Please also note that we halted slavery in the UK quite some time ago and we also have a concept of Health and Safety born out of respect for fellow humans, I doubt it would be easy to go back on either of these. It's also entirely feasible that few people in the South would be all that interested in surrendering their BMW, easy job and high wage to go and work in the North for a bowl of rice a day.

Manufacturing is not dead in the UK, if you look at GDP date it is very much alive and kicking. It is just that it doesn't employ armies of subsistence living slaves any more.

[Birdster]

Whilst he has some points I can only echo what has so been said by others with regards to public transport. It doesn't suit all of the time and just isn't good enough. It is packed itself. Anyone who uses the overhead from Shenfield to Liverpool Street at 8am can see this for themselves.

I went to visit someone yesterday at 9pm. So I took the tube from Stratford. All well and good. Walked to their house. I left about 11pm. Giving myself 5 minutes until the bus was due (direct route rather than three trains). I waited 20 mins in the cold and dark in not too great an area only for the bus to arrive packed.

I normally drive here and will do from now on. I'll go home first and collect the car as I could have driven home in that time.

I use the train and tube to get to work because it's quicker and more convenient than driving in rush hour and paying to park. However public transport doesn't suit me in all situations. He seems to account only for the young city folk and not the whole population. At the weekends, mainly a Sunday, or late evening I'll drive into London to bring family together that are not in the best of health and take them out somewhere. I'd prefer to use a tube due to the location, but they can't manage on public transport due to the nature of their illness/health.

[k-ink]

Birdster said:

Anyone who uses the overhead from Shenfield to Liverpool Street at 8am can see this for themselves.

You are far better travelling at 7.15 or so and get a comfy seat and fall asleep. Then relax in a coffee shop with some breakfast and read the paper upon your arrival. Yes it eats up more time in total, but it is extremely chilled in comparison to doing what 90% of others do at peak times. This is how I used to do it.

[LucreLout]

Pan Pan said:

Computers and the internet don't actually make anything, for that you need real people, real materials, doing real physical work, to produce real items and goods...somewhere.

Tell that to Gates, Zuckerberg, and Ellison, while they play a round of "Who's 4th Yacht is the biggest?"

[DonkeyApple]

k-ink said:

Birdster said:

Anyone who uses the overhead from Shenfield to Liverpool Street at 8am can see this for themselves.

You are far better travelling at 7.15 or so and get a comfy seat and fall asleep. Then relax in a coffee shop with some breakfast and read the paper upon your arrival. Yes it eats up more time in total, but it is extremely chilled in comparison to doing what 90% of others do at peak times. This is how I used to do it.

The trouble is that we can all come up with excuses or reasons as to why the article is wrong. For example, I only commute through London at certain times. I always avoid the 8am back office rush and either travel in earlier with the cleaners or later with the pensioners. I'll also leave either before or after. At the same time, pretty much every car journey I make is for pleasure purposes. And when it is work related I drive at a time when the rush-hour is over or not begun.

But, this is very clearly anomalous. The mere existence of a rush-hour defines that there are vast numbers of people traveling to the same places at the same times.

You can split out some of the timing but the bulk of the UK still operates around a 9-5 principle and few businesses can have differing departments starting or ending at different times, more so than they probably already have.

What you can change is how many people are going to the same place and where that/these places are. Decentralisation of the work place is the logical method to distribute congestion.

[J4CKO]

Do we really think "everyone must have the newest thing" ?

The age of something doesn't bother me in the slightest if it works, I enjoy it and get some use out of it.

I have certain things I really love because they are old, a 70s Sony Hi Fi Amp my grandma bought new, I used for years and now my son does.

With Cars it is more how it does things rather than age, in fact I dont really relish brand new cars, my 350Z still feels new to me as its a 2007, as long as they arent knackered or cause me undue grief, quite fine with older.

I was getting more enthusiastic than is strictly allowable over a very tidy Orange 1975 Marina Coupe TC my serial classic buying retires uncles bought the other day. I know a lot on here would like to "Kill it with fire" or get Top Gear to drop a Piano on it, I know its realistically pretty crap but I love seeing stuff like that, would be quite happy to drive it.

[Negative Creep]

LucreLout said:

Pan Pan said:

Computers and the internet don't actually make anything, for that you need real people, real materials, doing real physical work, to produce real items and goods...somewhere.

Tell that to Gates, Zuckerberg, and Ellison, while they play a round of "Who's 4th Yacht is the biggest?"

Where would they be without people driving to work to make their computers?

[k-ink]

So how could companies be motivated to start getting more people into work at off peak times? Or not into work at all, by allowing working from home via the internet. Perhaps if the traffic really does cost us £100bn (or whatever made up number you choose) then some tax breaks could be offered as an incentive? Perhaps the government could give the companies a break, which in turn gets passed onto the employees. By offering hugely discounted or even free rail fares to those who travel outside of ordinary times it may work. It would only need to be done for long enough to break the populations habits. Then business could revert to usual after some years. Money motivates people and business like nothing else I reckon. Look at how the mass population were herded into diesels as one example.

[Birdster]

DonkeyApple said:

k-ink said:

Birdster said:

Anyone who uses the overhead from Shenfield to Liverpool Street at 8am can see this for themselves.

You are far better travelling at 7.15 or so and get a comfy seat and fall asleep. Then relax in a coffee shop with some breakfast and read the paper upon your arrival. Yes it eats up more time in total, but it is extremely chilled in comparison to doing what 90% of others do at peak times. This is how I used to do it.

The trouble is that we can all come up with excuses or reasons as to why the article is wrong. For example, I only commute through London at certain times. I always avoid the 8am back office rush and either travel in earlier with the cleaners or later with the pensioners. I'll also leave either before or after. At the same time, pretty much every car journey I make is for pleasure purposes. And when it is work related I drive at a time when the rush-hour is over or not begun.

But, this is very clearly anomalous. The mere existence of a rush-hour defines that there are vast numbers of people traveling to the same places at the same times.

You can split out some of the timing but the bulk of the UK still operates around a 9-5 principle and few businesses can have differing departments starting or ending at different times, more so than they probably already have.

What you can change is how many people are going to the same place and where that/these places are. Decentralisation of the work place is the logical method to distribute congestion.

Agreed. My previous role was 10-6 and I was at the back of rush hour, much better. Although I found it ate into my evening more. As much as this journey is not as relaxed I'm actually home at a better time. Our team is expanding and I might try and move to an 8-4. Be perfect for travelling. As they say "You can't have everything."

[k-ink]

Birdster said:

Agreed. My previous role was 10-6 and I was at the back of rush hour, much better. Although I found it ate into my evening more. As much as this journey is not as relaxed I'm actually home at a better time. Our team is expanding and I might try and move to an 8-4. Be perfect for travelling. As they say "You can't have everything."

8-4 was my favourite time back in the day. Leaving london in record fast time was really great! Just this alteration to times at the same job can make life feel ten times better.

[Pan Pan]

LucreLout said:

Pan Pan said:

Computers and the internet don't actually make anything, for that you need real people, real materials, doing real physical work, to produce real items and goods...somewhere.

Tell that to Gates, Zuckerberg, and Ellison, while they play a round of "Who's 4th Yacht is the biggest?"

I am absolutely positive that any of the above named, did not do the work need to invent what they did
sitting in the middle of a field with no cover from the rain and snow, and with no electrical power, I am positive they don't walk to most of the places they need to go. I am postive the materials they used didn't leap out of the ground, and form themselves into the devices in question. Al that and much much more takes real work from real people using real materials, and components.
I bet anyone one of them wouldn't have invented much sitting in the open in the p*ssing rain and cold.
All too often those who do non manual work, sneer at those who do, but without those who do real work to produce real things, they wouldn't even have the clothes they stand up in. Like I said computers, and the internet don't actually make anything, they only facilitate the processes of those who do.

[LucreLout]

Negative Creep said:

Where would they be without people driving to work to make their computers?

The value isn't the computers, it's the software.

[LucreLout]

Pan Pan said:

I am absolutely positive that any of the above named, did not do the work need to invent what they did
sitting in the middle of a field with no cover from the rain and snow, and with no electrical power, I am positive they don't walk to most of the places they need to go. I am postive the materials they used didn't leap out of the ground, and form themselves into the devices in question. Al that and much much more takes real work from real people using real materials, and components.
I bet anyone one of them wouldn't have invented much sitting in the open in the p*ssing rain and cold.
All too often those who do non manual work, sneer at those who do, but without those who do real work to produce real things, they wouldn't even have the clothes they stand up in. Like I said computers, and the internet don't actually make anything, they only facilitate the processes of those who do.

The "real work" the bit that created the value of these companies was the software developers and marketing of that.
The value of the hardware is negligible and of no consequence. Nor are the buildings in which it is housed, no the electricity that powers it all. That isn't where the value was created nor the real work done.

[Clivey]

Pan Pan said:

Strangely even the computers we are using now, were made by real people using real components, and materials, made from real materials that were transported from real sources somwhere, by real vehicles just like the materials and components used for the buildings we live in, and the transport systems we use. Computers are fine but without rel people doing real (physical) work somewhere they and all the procese that realy on them, would simply not even exist. Someone somewhere has to do some real work for computers to exist, and for them to have the power to operate and the environment in which they can operate. this all takes some real work done by real people somewhere.

Calm down. - Nobody's suggesting that everyone's journeys are unnecessary - just that some of the millions of office workers that commute every day might be able to find another way.

DonkeyApple said:

Decentralisation of the work place is the logical method to distribute congestion.

Hundreds of millions of hours of people's lives are unnecessarily wasted commuting and sitting in traffic each year. Time that could undoubtedly be better spent.

[otolith]

Perhaps some of the stick could be replaced with the carrot of significant tax breaks for people who work from home and the companies which facilitate it?

[heebeegeetee]

k-ink said:

Of course there are some HGVs on the roads at night. My point was that by comparison the roads at night are pretty much empty compared to the day time. You are not reguarly nose to tail in stationary traffic for miles at a time at night on normal motorway routes (proximity to ports or dartford aside). You are free to put your foot down and make very good progress indeed. Which is precisely why I travel at night if I have to use the motorways.

So any measures which reduce the daytime traffic and increase the night time traffic will have clear benefits all round. Clearly most people in private cars going to work at regular office hours will want to travel during the day. But there are some journeys which are not 100% necessary to be done during the day. I would say any deliveries to major companies should only be done at night. Pay people more to work at night. These sort of premises are already staffed by security 24/7 anyway. That way there would be next to no lorries on the motorways during the day, aside from the absolutely essential. This can only help matters. No I am not just blaming HGVs! This was purely one example of an easy improvement.

It's not 'some' hgvs are on the road at night - they're pretty much all on the roads, or there are as many on the m'ways at night as there is by day, because the logistics of keeping the nations goods moving is a 24 hour operation.

Yes, you are right in that you can romp around the country free and easy at night, despite the numbers of hgvs - which shows that it is not hgvs that are a problem.

Deliveries to major companies are done by night. Pretty much everything you say that should be happening regarding deliveries and hgvs is already happening and has been for decades.

Where you get the idea that there would then be next to know hgvs on the roads by day I don't know. We are a nation of 62 million people with an avid appetite for consumption. We are a modern, overweight nation with a strong appetite for everything that consumerism can offer (and not least here on PH I would venture, with our love of cars and gadgets) and we cannot live that lifestyle at the cost we want without a highly sophisticated and efficient logistical operation. Doubling th cost and numbers of vehicles to deliver the same goods in half the time isn't going to happen not least because we won't pay for it.

We need to remember - the numbers of vehicles on our roads has remained static or has reduced across the board since 1950 with just one exception - the car. There are no more hgvs on the roads now than there was in the early fifties, numbers of psvs have reduced and numbers of cyclists have dropped to a fraction.

The only exception is the motor car, numbers of which have gone from what, a couple of million in the fifties to 28 million now according to latest figures. What difference a couple of hundred thousand hgvs make to some 20 million cars I don't know, other than I know that hgvs have not held me up for more than a few minutes per year (and cyclists far less than that).

[DonkeyApple]

Clivey said:

DonkeyApple said:

But poor residuals are surely a symptom of easy credit?

Of course - that's why I said "on a related note". What I meant was that if cars were looked-after and held their value, Joe Average wouldn't feel the "need" to change theirs every 3 years (or whenever theirs needed a service / tyres / brakes etc.).

I'd love to agree. I think the world would be a better place if you were correct.

However, the lure of the shineyshiney is much more powerful. The desire to not be seen as poorer than thy neighbour is really what drives the demand for the new car every 2/3 years. Easy debt is the mechanism that facilitates this fundamental human failing.