What is hacking you off today?

[MK Shrimper]

What do you mean there's not a lot government can do?

Government can increase the amount of the congestion charge.

It can close central London to non-essential traffic like taxis.

It can tax the polluters more.

It can use that income to improve public transport and build more cycle lanes (which are cheaper to maintain than roads as bicycles don't damage the road like heavy vehicles do despite being able to carry more people per hour).

The government has plenty of options, it just chooses to delay making the decisions that it will end up having to make sooner or later to reduce the ways the car industry is poisoning us.

What I mean is this Government doesn't have the will to act on Green issues. The statement of zero net emissions by 2050 isn't worth the paper it's printed on, what with the expansion of Heathrow and other anti-green policies. It's a huge vote loser as the majority of the general public either don't believe or just ignore the fact we're blithely walking into a ecological catastrophe.

 

[GBJ]

The ultimate aim may have been to reduce traffic, but if people are still willing to pay the charge then there's not a lot Government can do.

Correct, but the point is they haven’t reduced traffic, certainly not by any significant number, as they originally set out to do.

So in that respect, we can call it a failed experiment, scrap the charge altogether and rethink the whole thing.

It’s pretty self-explanatory really. London today, is still stop-start traffic. The charge was brought in, to reduce this problem. Why this specific problem? Because cars spew out the most pollution, when they’re in stop-start traffic.

To take it one step further, they’ve reduced the space for those cars - to accommodate cyclists - which is only adding to the current problem,

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

What I mean is this Government doesn't have the will to act on Green issues. The statement of zero net emissions by 2050 isn't worth the paper it's printed on, what with the expansion of Heathrow and other anti-green policies. It's a huge vote loser as the majority of the general public either don't believe or just ignore the fact we're blithely walking into a ecological catastrophe.

The thing is this isn't just a green issue (which they should be acting on anyway).

This is a health scandal.

The government is dragging it's heels on acting on a major health scandal that is subjecting millions of people daily to unsafe levels of pollutants.

Where's the anger about this? Car companies were conspiring to poison us and yet we let transport policy be dictated by their lobbyists.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

The thing is this isn't just a green issue (which they should be acting on anyway).

This is a health scandal.

The government is dragging it's heels on acting on a major health scandal that is subjecting millions of people daily to unsafe levels of pollutants.

Where's the anger about this? Car companies were conspiring to poison us and yet we let transport policy be dictated by their lobbyists.

And another thing, if we , as a nation, want to be world leaders in green living then no more old cars sent to Africa, or plastics to Asia etc. That may hurt some rich bastuards who make fortunes off 3rd world but it is the RIGHT way to show a standard.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Correct, but the point is they haven’t reduced traffic, certainly not by any significant number, as they originally set out to do.

So in that respect, we can call it a failed experiment, scrap the charge altogether and rethink the whole thing.

It’s pretty self-explanatory really. London today, is still stop-start traffic. The charge was brought in, to reduce this problem. Why this specific problem? Because cars spew out the most pollution, when they’re in stop-start traffic.

To take it one step further, they’ve reduced the space for those cars - to accommodate cyclists - which is only adding to the current problem,

I appreciate you're just trolling as you're bored but it's actually hugely increased bicycle traffic which would otherwise be driving or clogging up trains causing public transport users to revert to cars. If you remove the bicycle lanes more people revert to cars, thereby increasing delays and pollution.

 

[GBJ]

I appreciate you're just trolling as you're bored but it's actually hugely increased bicycle traffic which would otherwise be driving or clogging up trains causing public transport users to revert to cars. If you remove the bicycle lanes more people revert to cars, thereby increasing delays and pollution.

Ahh Ok mate, sweet as, can’t be arsed to converse with that kind of condescension.

 

[Special Blue]

I can see in the future London being a no go for tradesmen! I already know good tradesmen who refuse to work there.
The kit that has to be carried cannot be taken on a train! When the workplaces are run down the people that carry a pen to work will have to live with it

 

[Billy Bests boot laces]

Ignorant car drivers, who show no respect.
Was in a funeral procession this morning en route to Southend Crem. I was in the 2nd of 2 Limos behind the hearse. Turning left at Eastern Ave to go down Sutton Rd, one bloke tried to cut in the middle of us, couldn't be bothered to wait an extra 10 seconds!.
Fortunately he had to.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Ignorant car drivers, who show no respect.
Was in a funeral procession this morning en route to Southend Crem. I was in the 2nd of 2 Limos behind the hearse. Turning left at Eastern Ave to go down Sutton Rd, one bloke tried to cut in the middle of us, couldn't be bothered to wait an extra 10 seconds!.
Fortunately he had to.

That happened at a funeral procession I was part of, worse was that the car who wouldn6wait or have respect was going towards the fire station and cut between the hearse and next limo as they turned right into crem.
Are there so many bad drivers, rotten people or rude impatient idiots driving?

 

[MK Shrimper]

Pretty girl sells small tubs of dirty bathwater for $30 and they sell out in seconds.

I don't understand this world any more.

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...lphine-gamer-girl-instagram-selling-bath-wate

 

[GBJ]

Pretty girl sells small tubs of dirty bathwater for $30 and they sell out in seconds.

I don't understand this world any more.

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...lphine-gamer-girl-instagram-selling-bath-wate

Being bought by those who wear shoes without socks

 

[MK Shrimper]

Being bought by those who wear shoes without socks

Unlikely. I doubt these men ever leave their bedrooms apart from answering the door for their daily dose of pizza.

 

[GBJ]

Unlikely. I doubt these men ever leave their bedrooms apart from answering the door for their daily dose of pizza.

Definitely perverts though

 

[MK Shrimper]

Definitely perverts though

Of that there can be do denying. If they spoke to a real live woman in the flesh rather than over a webcam where their pants are around their ankles they'd probably combust.

 

[GBJ]

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/cycle-superhighway-has-made-air-pollution-worse/

@Yorkshire Blue more trolling I presume?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/cycle-superhighway-has-made-air-pollution-worse/

@Yorkshire Blue more trolling I presume?

I haven't time for this now but you're not even reading the article.

On average, environmental consultants Ricardo found average levels of toxic fumes at more than twice the legal limit, only slightly better than those recorded back in 2012 before the cycle lane was built.

It has improved, just by not as much as needed.

 

[GBJ]

I haven't time for this now but you're not even reading the article.

It has improved, just by not as much as needed.

What have I missed? Where is the improvement?

The whole point of the scheme, was to drastically reduce pollution. The article is fairly concise. The super cycle highway (in this section of London, at least), has not been successful. It is, for all intents & purposes, pointless.

And the proof is there for you. In three years of it being used, it hasn’t significantly reduced pollution, and is only marginally less than it was 7 years ago.

If I’m missing something, then I’m all ears.

 

[MK Shrimper]

What have I missed? Where is the improvement?

The whole point of the scheme, was to drastically reduce pollution. The article is fairly concise. The super cycle highway (in this section of London, at least), has not been successful. It is, for all intents & purposes, pointless.

And the proof is there for you. In three years of it being used, it hasn’t significantly reduced pollution, and is only marginally less than it was 7 years ago.

If I’m missing something, then I’m all ears.

In a statement, he said: "Despite what some critics may say, cycle lanes do not cause pollution.
“The opposite is true: enabling more people to cycle and reducing car use is part of the solution to solving our toxic air crisis, with CS3 used by 11,000 cyclists a day."

 

[GBJ]

In a statement, he said: "Despite what some critics may say, cycle lanes do not cause pollution.
“The opposite is true: enabling more people to cycle and reducing car use is part of the solution to solving our toxic air crisis, with CS3 used by 11,000 cyclists a day."

Firstly, the guy saying that, is the Walking & Cycling Commissioner at City Hall. I think we can safely assume he could be partially biased.

Secondly, if cycle lanes reduce pollution, as he’s claiming, then the pollution levels would be falling drastically. Which of course, they’re not. It even states in that report, that they’re only slightly better than they were seven years ago.

Thirdly, the idea that “getting people out of cars”, will solve the problem, is just shortsighted. How do you account for the numerous amounts of coaches, buses, vans, HGV’s & taxi’s?

Lastly, I can see the argument that they don’t make pollution worse, but the stats say they don’t make it better. Oh sorry, they make it “slightly better”. That’s makes it all worthwhile.

 

[MK Shrimper]

Firstly, the guy saying that, is the Walking & Cycling Commissioner at City Hall. I think we can safely assume he could be partially biased.

Secondly, if cycle lanes reduce pollution, as he’s claiming, then the pollution levels would be falling drastically. Which of course, they’re not. It even states in that report, that they’re only slightly better than they were seven years ago.

Thirdly, the idea that “getting people out of cars”, will solve the problem, is just shortsighted. How do you account for the numerous amounts of coaches, buses, vans, HGV’s & taxi’s?

Lastly, I can see the argument that they don’t make pollution worse, but the stats say they don’t make it better. Oh sorry, they make it “slightly better”. That’s makes it all worthwhile.

No they're not. What do you suggest would help? I suggest banning anything but electric vehicles from central London (and other major cities) or upping the charge to something like £50 a day. That'd put off the selfish driver who is too sociopathic to mix with the hoi-polloi in public transport (and I knew someone who would not use any form of public transport because of this very reason).