Forum home Road cycling forum Campaign

Portsmouth = 1st city with a blanket 20mph limit

1246735

Posts

  • Simon L2Simon L2 Posts: 2,908
    'road tax'
    doncherjusluvvit?
  • slowfenslowfen Posts: 312
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So the roads wouldn't exist in the first place if it wasn't for car drivers.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Funny I thought roads existed before the car was ever thought about
    Hills? what are they
  • slowfenslowfen Posts: 312
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">They've moved themselves away from what they don't like<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    More often than not for a better quality of life, which includes getting away from traffic. the boss you talk of nimbyism, this is it move away and inflict it on someone else, who is unable to move away
    Hills? what are they
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    If anyone has 'more' right to the highway than anyone else (which they don't, but)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Yes they do. Have another read of that study I gave you a couple of weeks ago.
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>


    then it's motorists, <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Nope
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>


    because they're the ones that pay the road tax,
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    No-one pays road tax. There's no such thing.
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>


    petrol tax
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    so?
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>


    and tolls that contribute to the upkeep and building in the first place of the roads.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Reading for today is on toll roads, where they are, and who funds them.
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>


    So the roads wouldn't exist in the first place if it wasn't for car drivers.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    What about the roads that cars aren't allowed to drive on? Are they imaginary? Your license gives you no right to drive on them does it Bonjy? Because you have no right.



    __________________________________________________________
    <font size="1">Road Safety Expert</font id="size1">
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    If anyone has 'more' right to the highway than anyone else (which they don't, but) then it's motorists, because they're the ones that pay the road tax, petrol tax and tolls that contribute to the upkeep and building in the first place of the roads. So the roads wouldn't exist in the first place if it wasn't for car drivers.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Nope, they don't contribute enough to upkeep the roads and they didn't contribute enough in the first place to build them, they definitely don't contirbute enough to cover the damaging effects of their chosen transport.

    In effect the entire population is subsidising the motorist.
  • slowfenslowfen Posts: 312
    In effect the entire population is subsidising the motorist.
    [/quote]

    especially if you include the cost of health care for both acute (accidents) and chronic (effects of pollution, lack of exercise. Also social,destruction of communities due to commuters who don't engage where they work, or live, but with friends else where. And in poorer parts of the country (I have seen this) Families go without to have a car so that they are not seen as diferent/ostracised.
    Hills? what are they
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by slowfen</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So the roads wouldn't exist in the first place if it wasn't for car drivers.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Funny I thought roads existed before the car was ever thought about
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    True, 'roads' existed, but very few and far between, and not as we know them today. There were just a few dirt tracks here and there. The growth in the road network has been exponential since the invention of the car.
    For example, the A1 was one of the only trunk roads that existed, and was basically a farm track - petering out every few miles.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by slowfen</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">They've moved themselves away from what they don't like<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    More often than not for a better quality of life, which includes getting away from traffic. the boss you talk of nimbyism, this is it move away and inflict it on someone else, who is unable to move away
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Nimbyism is not wanting to move yourself but wanting everything you don't like to move away from you.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    If anyone has 'more' right to the highway than anyone else (which they don't, but)<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Yes they do. Have another read of that study I gave you a couple of <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    If I remember rightly I did read it and it contained no such thing.
    We've had this debate before, many times, and every time I win it.

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    No-one pays road tax. There's no such thing.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    You could have fooled me last time my tax disc ran out...

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Mister Paul</i>

    What about the roads that <b>cars</b> aren't allowed to drive on? Are they imaginary? Your license gives you no right to drive on them does it Bonjy? Because you have no right.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    What about them. I don't drive a car! HAHAHAHAHAHA!
    "Except for access" is normally the wording on the sign on pedstrianised roads. I count as 'Access' now Pauly, unlucky!! [:D]
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peyote</i>


    Nope, they don't contribute enough to upkeep the roads and they didn't contribute enough in the first place to build them, they definitely don't contirbute enough to cover the damaging effects of their chosen transport.

    In effect the entire population is subsidising the motorist.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Absolute tosh, the motorist has been milked under Blair's government. Petrol tax alone probably covers road maintenance, then they've got speed camera fines, road tax, tolls, other fines, etc. etc.
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peyote</i>


    Nope, they don't contribute enough to upkeep the roads and they didn't contribute enough in the first place to build them, they definitely don't contirbute enough to cover the damaging effects of their chosen transport.

    In effect the entire population is subsidising the motorist.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Absolute tosh, the motorist has been milked under Blair's government. Petrol tax alone probably covers road maintenance, then they've got speed camera fines, road tax, tolls, other fines, etc. etc.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Ha ha! You've fallen for the old beleaguered-British-motorist line!

    It's not true though, motorists never have, and probably never will pay for all the facilities they require and the damage they cause.
  • slowfenslowfen Posts: 312
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Nimbyism is not wanting to move yourself but wanting everything you don't like to move away from you.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Sorry yes wrong in use of term.

    But it dos'nt alter the fact that people move away to escape unwanted living conditions, but expect others to put up with it so that their own inconvienience is minimised
    Hills? what are they
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peyote</i>


    Ha ha! You've fallen for the old beleaguered-British-motorist line!

    It's not true though, motorists never have, and probably never will pay for all the facilities they require and the damage they cause.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">If you take into account all the money they save the economy not just the amount they pay directly in hard cash, e.g. things like not ALL having to use subsidised buses, getting to work quicker, etc. they do.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by slowfen</i>


    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Nimbyism is not wanting to move yourself but wanting everything you don't like to move away from you.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Sorry yes wrong in use of term.

    But it dos'nt alter the fact that people move away to escape unwanted living conditions, but expect others to put up with it so that their own inconvienience is minimised
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    What do you mean "expect others to put up with it"?! Why is it anything to do with them what the living conditions in the city are like and who has to 'put up' with it? They don't 'expect' poor people to put up with it any more than anyone else anywhere in the country including you 'expect them to put up with it'.
    <i>They</i> didn't <i>make</i> it 'unwanted'! They didn't live there, dirty the place up a bit and then move out and refused to tidy it before a poor person moved in.
    They're perfectly adequate living conditions, the fact is the people who live in the country and commute in can afford more luxury living conditions, so they go and live in them. Why shouldn't they?
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peyote</i>


    Ha ha! You've fallen for the old beleaguered-British-motorist line!

    It's not true though, motorists never have, and probably never will pay for all the facilities they require and the damage they cause.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">If you take into account all the money they save the economy not just the amount they pay directly in hard cash, e.g. things like not ALL having to use subsidised buses, getting to work quicker, etc. they do.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    So instead of subsidising the buses, we subsidise private motor vehicles?

    I'm unconvinced that people get to work quicker by car either, how many urban areas suffer congestion and gridlock twice daily at rush hour? I reckon in most of the conurbations of this country train travel is probably faster than car.

    I would be surprised if the economics of it all came out in private motor vehicles favour!
  • slowfenslowfen Posts: 312
    But you have forgotten the cost to the health services and social services due to the carnage of 3500+ deaths and 60000+ hospital admissions each year. Also the cost to the police for accident investigation, the courts for prosecutions etc
    Hills? what are they
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by slowfen</i>

    "so that their own inconvienience is minimised"
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You're talking out of your censored . There's always going to be SOMEONE living in the city. How do the people who live in the city 'minimise the inconvenience' of the people who commute?
  • slowfenslowfen Posts: 312
    The ones whose inconvience I was talking about where the ones who have moved out, and dont want the inconvienence of slower speed limits, traffic calming. Which is to try and make it a better environment for those who cannot move out.
    Hills? what are they
  • dondaredondare Posts: 2,113
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by slowfen</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">So the roads wouldn't exist in the first place if it wasn't for car drivers.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Funny I thought roads existed before the car was ever thought about
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    True, 'roads' existed, but very few and far between, and not as we know them today. There were just a few dirt tracks here and there. The growth in the road network has been exponential since the invention of the car.
    For example, the A1 was one of the only trunk roads that existed, and was basically a farm track - petering out every few miles.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Such Ignorance.
    It was actually the invention of the bicycle that lead to the massive improvements in public roads that motorists were then able to take advantage of.
    As I've said elaswhere, my entire commute from home to work is made on roads which were built before the car was invented.

    Baby elephants? Pah!!
    This post contains traces of nuts.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peyote</i>

    So instead of subsidising the buses, we subsidise private motor vehicles?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Well it'd be a better return on investment, a car carrying one person directly to where they want to go is a lot more efficient than a bus carrying one person who's only driving it round in circles all day because he's paid taxpayer's money to.

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peyote</i>


    I'm unconvinced that people get to work quicker by car either, how many urban areas suffer congestion and gridlock twice daily at rush hour? I reckon in most of the conurbations of this country train travel is probably faster than car.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Most cities only have one or a few train stations, so trains almost never go where you're trying to get to.
    If you live in the centre of Newcastle, Doncaster, Newark, Peterborough or London and want to get to the centre of any of the others, for instance, then train is the fastest method. However if I want to get from one side of the city centre to the other (at rush hour), then bike's probably fastest. If I live out in the sticks and want to get to a technology park on the outskirts of the city, then car's probably fastest.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dondare</i>

    Such Ignorance.
    It was actually the invention of the bicycle that lead to the massive improvements in public roads that motorists were then able to take advantage of.
    As I've said elaswhere, my entire commute from home to work is made on roads which were built before the car was invented.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Absolute rubbish What a stupified figment of your rose-tinted imagination. Bicycles existed in the 19th century, long before tarmac roads were commonplace.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dondare</i>

    As I've said elaswhere, my entire commute from home to work is made on roads which were built before the car was invented.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    In <i>London</i>?! They'll have been rebuilt and repaved and rebuilt again countless times since though. The fact that the <i>route</i> may have existed is irrelevant, it'll have been a dirt track in old times before the car was invented.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by slowfen</i>


    The ones whose inconvience I was talking about where the ones who have moved out, and dont want the inconvienence of slower speed limits, traffic calming. Which is to try and make it a better environment for those who cannot move out.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Oh right, I see. But I still question that it's 'better' for the residents to have 20mph speed limits. Partly because they are often also drivers in the city, and also because of the road crossing aspect with the congestion spreading out as I highlighted earlier.
  • dondaredondare Posts: 2,113
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    If anyone has 'more' right to the highway than anyone else (which they don't, but) then it's motorists, because they're the ones that pay the road tax, petrol tax and tolls that contribute to the upkeep and building in the first place of the roads. So the roads wouldn't exist in the first place if it wasn't for car drivers.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    The Road Fund was abolished in 1936, partially to disabuse motorists of this particular myth.
    Motorists are taxed for one reason alone: because they'll pay it. Motorists are no more worthy than drinkers or smokers in this respect.


    Baby elephants? Pah!!
    This post contains traces of nuts.
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peyote</i>

    So instead of subsidising the buses, we subsidise private motor vehicles?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Well it'd be a better return on investment, a car carrying one person directly to where they want to go is a lot more efficient than a bus carrying one person who's only driving it round in circles all day because he's paid taxpayer's money to.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    That's not a very good argument because it's based on your prejudice. You'll have to try harder if you want to convince someone (though I don't believe you really do!).

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    Most cities only have one or a few train stations, so trains almost never go where you're trying to get to.
    If you live in the centre of Newcastle, Doncaster, Newark, Peterborough or London and want to get to the centre of any of the others, for instance, then train is the fastest method. However if I want to get from one side of the city centre to the other (at rush hour), then bike's probably fastest. If I live out in the sticks and want to get to a technology park on the outskirts of the city, then car's probably fastest.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    So the car isn't the quickest form of transport for getting to work in a lot of cases then? Therefore I would suggest it isn't necessarily an economic benefit. That's all I was trying to get across!
  • dondaredondare Posts: 2,113
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dondare</i>

    As I've said elaswhere, my entire commute from home to work is made on roads which were built before the car was invented.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    In <i>London</i>?! They'll have been rebuilt and repaved and rebuilt again countless times since though. The fact that the <i>route</i> may have existed is irrelevant, it'll have been a dirt track in old times before the car was invented.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">It wasn't a dirt track; cyclists demanded, and got, improved roads suitable for their needs before cars were invented.
    It certainly gets resurfaced a lot because motor vehicles damage it a lot. But if you think that a fresh skim of Tarmac can obliterate old rights of way, or that anyone owes any thanks to motorists for the existance of the road, then you are ignorant.

    Baby elephants? Pah!!
    This post contains traces of nuts.
  • dondaredondare Posts: 2,113
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dondare</i>

    Such Ignorance.
    It was actually the invention of the bicycle that lead to the massive improvements in public roads that motorists were then able to take advantage of.
    As I've said elaswhere, my entire commute from home to work is made on roads which were built before the car was invented.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    Absolute bol<i></i>locks! What a stupified figment of your rose-tinted imagination. Bicycles existed in the 19th century, long before tarmac roads were commonplace.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    The 19th century wasn't the Dark Ages.

    Baby elephants? Pah!!
    This post contains traces of nuts.
  • The BosscpThe Bosscp Posts: 647
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dondare</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>

    If anyone has 'more' right to the highway than anyone else (which they don't, but) then it's motorists, because they're the ones that pay the road tax, petrol tax and tolls that contribute to the upkeep and building in the first place of the roads. So the roads wouldn't exist in the first place if it wasn't for car drivers.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    The Road Fund was abolished in 1936, partially to disabuse motorists of this particular myth.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    They've rebadged it you fool!
  • CabCab Posts: 770
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by The Boss</i>
    They've rebadged it you fool!
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    They didn't re-badge it. They removed road tax and replaced it with another tax that is not earmarked for road expenditure. Its just another tax, and it no more gives the motorist extra rights than paying VAT or duty on alcohol.





    <i>Free baby elephants for every citizen</i>
    Vote Arch for Prime Minister
  • dondaredondare Posts: 2,113
    "They've rebadged it you fool!"

    Do you believe what you're saying or are you just taking the wee?

    Baby elephants? Pah!!
    This post contains traces of nuts.
Sign In or Register to comment.