ULEZ charge in 2021
Discussion
NomduJour said:
C70R said:
Me pointing out the inadequacies in your argument really bothers you, doesn't it?
To the point where you're making up lies to make yourself feel better.
How sad.
Have you made up a reason to support the ULEZ extension yet? To the point where you're making up lies to make yourself feel better.
How sad.
Or are we due another laughing smiley?
Its nothing more than a bit of virtue signalling tbh.
Graveworm said:
C70R said:
Graveworm said:
C70R said:
Intriguing that you've taken "outer London's poorest" to mean "all of London's poorest", just because it supports your view.
I wonder why, if the data is so easily accessible, they weren't able to prove just how many of all London's poorest own cars?
(Hint: it's because, while the gap has closed in recent years, a very small proportion of London's poorest live in outer London)
On the face of it, without any actual numbers, this stat is absolutely meaningless anyway:
"the lowest earning 10% of Londoners have higher car ownership than the highest earning 10% of inner Londoners". It literally tells me nothing.
:
it's over twice as likely and it is the majority of the poorest in outer London. I wonder why, if the data is so easily accessible, they weren't able to prove just how many of all London's poorest own cars?
(Hint: it's because, while the gap has closed in recent years, a very small proportion of London's poorest live in outer London)
On the face of it, without any actual numbers, this stat is absolutely meaningless anyway:
"the lowest earning 10% of Londoners have higher car ownership than the highest earning 10% of inner Londoners". It literally tells me nothing.
:
Or have we moved on from that one again?
I really can't keep up with all of these paper-thin objections.
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Question has been avoided yet again!
Its nothing more than a bit of virtue signalling tbh.
"Anything I don't agree with is virtue signalling". Brilliant.Its nothing more than a bit of virtue signalling tbh.
Now we've passed the point of you telling obvious lies, I feel like you're one step away from calling ULEZ supporters "woke" here.
Let’s be honest here fellas. We all know that TFL / Khan/ Ulez promoters have used and continue to use skewed statistics, fibs, half truths and outright whoppers to push the Ulez agenda.
The real debate here should be not who is bearing the brunt of the Ulez expansion etc but why there is an exemption for non-compliant vehicles at all.
After all (we are told by the Ulez lobby) that it’s all about “clean” air and Londoners Health not money. The pollutants and emissions of non compliant cars cause X number of deaths and ill health to hundreds of Londoners ( according to Khan etc and I don’t think there’s any debate about the effects only the numbers )so therefore by not banning non compliant vehicles Mayor Khan/ London assembly/TFL are perpetuating the release of harmful emissions into Londons air and are therefore directly responsible for any future deaths or Ill health Londoners may suffer in the future where air pollution is the main or a contributory factor.
If it’s about health ban them outright - if it’s about money at least have the decency to admit it
The real debate here should be not who is bearing the brunt of the Ulez expansion etc but why there is an exemption for non-compliant vehicles at all.
After all (we are told by the Ulez lobby) that it’s all about “clean” air and Londoners Health not money. The pollutants and emissions of non compliant cars cause X number of deaths and ill health to hundreds of Londoners ( according to Khan etc and I don’t think there’s any debate about the effects only the numbers )so therefore by not banning non compliant vehicles Mayor Khan/ London assembly/TFL are perpetuating the release of harmful emissions into Londons air and are therefore directly responsible for any future deaths or Ill health Londoners may suffer in the future where air pollution is the main or a contributory factor.
If it’s about health ban them outright - if it’s about money at least have the decency to admit it
Edited by Rockettvr on Wednesday 5th April 09:59
C70R said:
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Question has been avoided yet again!
Its nothing more than a bit of virtue signalling tbh.
"Anything I don't agree with is virtue signalling". Brilliant.Its nothing more than a bit of virtue signalling tbh.
Now we've passed the point of you telling obvious lies, I feel like you're one step away from calling ULEZ supporters "woke" here.
Given that ULEZ’s implementation will be completely irrelevant in terms of pollution, it’s difficult to judge support for it as being anything more than fashionable opinion. As you continue to ably demonstrate.
Rockettvr said:
If it’s about health ban them outright - if it’s about money at least have the decency to admit it
I don't understand why right-wingers keep posting that they want stuff banned? Is it so you could then brand the authorities as socialists/communists if they actually did it?Joey Deacon said:
Less than five months to go now, are people changing their cars in the background or are hundreds of thousands of people either going to pay the £12.50 a day or hope it is abandoned or delayed?
I suspect it will vary, just as people respond to any other change. Some will have already changed (e.g. me), some will be hoping it just goes away on its own, some will intend to change, but won't do so until they actually start getting charged and some won't be aware at all until they make their first journey.You can already see the impact on prices in and around London - just check the prices of compliant and non-compliant equivalent cars (diesels around the 2013 to 2016 date) in the area.
I also suspect that very few Londoners will put up with paying £12.50 per day to use their car.
Joey Deacon said:
Less than five months to go now, are people changing their cars in the background or are hundreds of thousands of people either going to pay the £12.50 a day or hope it is abandoned or delayed?
We've got a mix here. My Dad will change his car and lives in the zone, but my sister who lives almost on the border, doesn't really have the cash (although her BMW is on it's last legs). My car is compliant but as I'm just outside of the new zone I'm just hoping it either doesn't come into force with the councils refusing to put up cameras etc. or preferably it triggers us to be part of TFL/Zone 6, £7 for a bus and £18 return into London on the train is painful and if they're by proxy raising the prices of everything else and continuing to kill of driving here, there has to be some kind of alternative.
TikTak said:
We've got a mix here. My Dad will change his car and lives in the zone, but my sister who lives almost on the border, doesn't really have the cash (although her BMW is on it's last legs).
My car is compliant but as I'm just outside of the new zone I'm just hoping it either doesn't come into force with the councils refusing to put up cameras etc. or preferably it triggers us to be part of TFL/Zone 6, £7 for a bus and £18 return into London on the train is painful and if they're by proxy raising the prices of everything else and continuing to kill of driving here, there has to be some kind of alternative.
TfL seem very resistant to moving places into different zones. I've lived in Kingston/Surbiton for years and there has been significant campaigns to move the stations from zone 6 to 4/5 for as long as I can remember, but it has never happened.My car is compliant but as I'm just outside of the new zone I'm just hoping it either doesn't come into force with the councils refusing to put up cameras etc. or preferably it triggers us to be part of TFL/Zone 6, £7 for a bus and £18 return into London on the train is painful and if they're by proxy raising the prices of everything else and continuing to kill of driving here, there has to be some kind of alternative.
Further out, places that are currently outside the zones altogether like Epsom and Esher have groups that want the to be added to zone 6, but nothing has ever happened as far as I'm aware.
braddo said:
Rockettvr said:
If it’s about health ban them outright - if it’s about money at least have the decency to admit it
I don't understand why right-wingers keep posting that they want stuff banned? Is it so you could then brand the authorities as socialists/communists if they actually did it?I’m just trying (poorly) to highlight the duplicity- I’ve never heard Khan talk about Ulez in terms of being a revenue stream , it’s always about pollution from cars and it’s effect on health , but then he implements a scheme which allows that pollution to continue as long as you give him £12.50 a day.
So not only is he allowing pollution to continue ( although at a lower rate) he or TFL etc are actually benefiting financially from the continuing misery of the people who suffer from the effects of said pollution.
If the effects of non Ulez cars are so injurious then the only logical thing would be a total ban of those vehicles, not creating a scheme to monetise it.
The data is a bit old but not sure there would have been big changes in car ownership since. It is a TFL report on car ownership.
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-12-how-m...
Page 8 - Personal car ownership by income and gender, London residents
For those on incomes less than £25k per year, 35% of males have a car and 24% of females.
For data from the ONS - Percentage of households with cars by income group, tenure and household composition: Table A47
Includes data for 2018
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...
For the poorest, there is the ULEZ scrappage scheme. People are eligible if they receive benefits such as universal credit, housing benefit, working tax credit, child tax credit. Lots of employed working class people qualify. And it is a cash grant that is received. There is no obligation to buy a brand new car (or indeed any car at all - so it can be compensation for people giving up their cars too).
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-12-how-m...
Page 8 - Personal car ownership by income and gender, London residents
For those on incomes less than £25k per year, 35% of males have a car and 24% of females.
For data from the ONS - Percentage of households with cars by income group, tenure and household composition: Table A47
Includes data for 2018
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...
For the poorest, there is the ULEZ scrappage scheme. People are eligible if they receive benefits such as universal credit, housing benefit, working tax credit, child tax credit. Lots of employed working class people qualify. And it is a cash grant that is received. There is no obligation to buy a brand new car (or indeed any car at all - so it can be compensation for people giving up their cars too).
Rockettvr said:
Not at all
I’m just trying (poorly) to highlight the duplicity- I’ve never heard Khan talk about Ulez in terms of being a revenue stream , it’s always about pollution from cars and it’s effect on health , but then he implements a scheme which allows that pollution to continue as long as you give him £12.50 a day.
So not only is he allowing pollution to continue ( although at a lower rate) he or TFL etc are actually benefiting financially from the continuing misery of the people who suffer from the effects of said pollution.
If the effects of non Ulez cars are so injurious then the only logical thing would be a total ban of those vehicles, not creating a scheme to monetise it.
The £12.50 per day is high enough that it drives a big change in behaviour, but still allows people to use non-compliant cars occasionally with minimal impact.I’m just trying (poorly) to highlight the duplicity- I’ve never heard Khan talk about Ulez in terms of being a revenue stream , it’s always about pollution from cars and it’s effect on health , but then he implements a scheme which allows that pollution to continue as long as you give him £12.50 a day.
So not only is he allowing pollution to continue ( although at a lower rate) he or TFL etc are actually benefiting financially from the continuing misery of the people who suffer from the effects of said pollution.
If the effects of non Ulez cars are so injurious then the only logical thing would be a total ban of those vehicles, not creating a scheme to monetise it.
It's a bit like using car parks in the West End of London - at £10+ per hour it's obviously not something people will do or can do regularly, but for an occasional 'treat' people might use the car and pay £30 for parking as part of a night out etc.
braddo said:
Rockettvr said:
Not at all
I’m just trying (poorly) to highlight the duplicity- I’ve never heard Khan talk about Ulez in terms of being a revenue stream , it’s always about pollution from cars and it’s effect on health , but then he implements a scheme which allows that pollution to continue as long as you give him £12.50 a day.
So not only is he allowing pollution to continue ( although at a lower rate) he or TFL etc are actually benefiting financially from the continuing misery of the people who suffer from the effects of said pollution.
If the effects of non Ulez cars are so injurious then the only logical thing would be a total ban of those vehicles, not creating a scheme to monetise it.
The £12.50 per day is high enough that it drives a big change in behaviour, but still allows people to use non-compliant cars occasionally with minimal impact.I’m just trying (poorly) to highlight the duplicity- I’ve never heard Khan talk about Ulez in terms of being a revenue stream , it’s always about pollution from cars and it’s effect on health , but then he implements a scheme which allows that pollution to continue as long as you give him £12.50 a day.
So not only is he allowing pollution to continue ( although at a lower rate) he or TFL etc are actually benefiting financially from the continuing misery of the people who suffer from the effects of said pollution.
If the effects of non Ulez cars are so injurious then the only logical thing would be a total ban of those vehicles, not creating a scheme to monetise it.
It's a bit like using car parks in the West End of London - at £10+ per hour it's obviously not something people will do or can do regularly, but for an occasional 'treat' people might use the car and pay £30 for parking as part of a night out etc.
NomduJour said:
C70R said:
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Question has been avoided yet again!
Its nothing more than a bit of virtue signalling tbh.
"Anything I don't agree with is virtue signalling". Brilliant.Its nothing more than a bit of virtue signalling tbh.
Now we've passed the point of you telling obvious lies, I feel like you're one step away from calling ULEZ supporters "woke" here.
Given that ULEZ’s implementation will be completely irrelevant in terms of pollution, it’s difficult to judge support for it as being anything more than fashionable opinion. As you continue to ably demonstrate.
If you disagree with ulez you are a liar. Name calling is a tactic Khan himself uses. So it's not surprising it's rubbed off.
kingston12 said:
TikTak said:
We've got a mix here. My Dad will change his car and lives in the zone, but my sister who lives almost on the border, doesn't really have the cash (although her BMW is on it's last legs).
My car is compliant but as I'm just outside of the new zone I'm just hoping it either doesn't come into force with the councils refusing to put up cameras etc. or preferably it triggers us to be part of TFL/Zone 6, £7 for a bus and £18 return into London on the train is painful and if they're by proxy raising the prices of everything else and continuing to kill of driving here, there has to be some kind of alternative.
TfL seem very resistant to moving places into different zones. I've lived in Kingston/Surbiton for years and there has been significant campaigns to move the stations from zone 6 to 4/5 for as long as I can remember, but it has never happened.My car is compliant but as I'm just outside of the new zone I'm just hoping it either doesn't come into force with the councils refusing to put up cameras etc. or preferably it triggers us to be part of TFL/Zone 6, £7 for a bus and £18 return into London on the train is painful and if they're by proxy raising the prices of everything else and continuing to kill of driving here, there has to be some kind of alternative.
Further out, places that are currently outside the zones altogether like Epsom and Esher have groups that want the to be added to zone 6, but nothing has ever happened as far as I'm aware.
They use Epsom as the example, it's much further out than here and has been Zone 6 for ages, not to mention it actually extends beyond the M25 in the NE/Essex. It's simply an expansion.
Going off at a bit of a tangent. They want to build over 1000 homes here in the next few years, there is already no space at the GP, no NHS dentists in the entire borough and limited transport infrastructure. It's ludicrous to not expand those things and simultaneously add more people and penalize drivers and local businesses.
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Got to be at least the 5th time the question has directly been asked.?
If you disagree with ulez you are a liar. Name calling is a tactic Khan himself uses. So it's not surprising it's rubbed off.
Does congestion not exist outside of the north and south circ then? Could have fooled me. You think there will be no benefit at all for everyone who lives on a busy road like the A20 or A12, or near a congested high street, or walk outside schools in winter when loads of parents are idling in their dirty diesels?? If you disagree with ulez you are a liar. Name calling is a tactic Khan himself uses. So it's not surprising it's rubbed off.
braddo said:
Does congestion not exist outside of the north and south circ then? Could have fooled me. You think there will be no benefit at all for everyone who lives on a busy road like the A20 or A12, or near a congested high street, or walk outside schools in winter when loads of parents are idling in their dirty diesels??
Impact assessment tells us it won’t make any difference. Again - if nearly every vehicle is compliant anyway, how is taxing or removing the tiny proportion that isn’t going to magically clean the already very clean air? Fantasy land.
TikTak said:
kingston12 said:
TikTak said:
We've got a mix here. My Dad will change his car and lives in the zone, but my sister who lives almost on the border, doesn't really have the cash (although her BMW is on it's last legs).
My car is compliant but as I'm just outside of the new zone I'm just hoping it either doesn't come into force with the councils refusing to put up cameras etc. or preferably it triggers us to be part of TFL/Zone 6, £7 for a bus and £18 return into London on the train is painful and if they're by proxy raising the prices of everything else and continuing to kill of driving here, there has to be some kind of alternative.
TfL seem very resistant to moving places into different zones. I've lived in Kingston/Surbiton for years and there has been significant campaigns to move the stations from zone 6 to 4/5 for as long as I can remember, but it has never happened.My car is compliant but as I'm just outside of the new zone I'm just hoping it either doesn't come into force with the councils refusing to put up cameras etc. or preferably it triggers us to be part of TFL/Zone 6, £7 for a bus and £18 return into London on the train is painful and if they're by proxy raising the prices of everything else and continuing to kill of driving here, there has to be some kind of alternative.
Further out, places that are currently outside the zones altogether like Epsom and Esher have groups that want the to be added to zone 6, but nothing has ever happened as far as I'm aware.
They use Epsom as the example, it's much further out than here and has been Zone 6 for ages, not to mention it actually extends beyond the M25 in the NE/Essex. It's simply an expansion.
Going off at a bit of a tangent. They want to build over 1000 homes here in the next few years, there is already no space at the GP, no NHS dentists in the entire borough and limited transport infrastructure. It's ludicrous to not expand those things and simultaneously add more people and penalize drivers and local businesses.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff