Traffic Chaos Trafalger Square - Wednesday Mornings

Esinem

"Porsche driver that thought he owned the road so rammed a bike from behind" I think you'll find "he" was a 'she'. I have video of her but sadly not the reg'n of her car or the actual incident.

I spoke to a few cyclists today and found that they were concerned that they were next in the sights of WCC cash machine. However, it seems we need to give them no tips on what to do! It appears it would be like giving grannies egg sucking lessons! Anyway, I'll be there to support their fight against Wastemonster Council if it comes to that.



Court verdict on the case against WCC expected friday

[/url]

gordon861

Different Porsche driver, I saw her getting a bollocking from the cops for something, but the accident was a male in a left hand drive one on UK plates.

Aidy

They dont charge cyclists for all the cycle railings to chain their bikes to, and bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads.

Dunno if anyone else has pointed this out yet, but mutter mutter, neither do motorcycles, or cars.

Esinem

@Aidy " bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads...neither do motorcycles or cars"

Huh? So where does my road tax, fuel duty etc. go and who does pay for the roads?

@Gordon861 Feckin' Porsche drivers, eh? I can say this having had two 944s

Aidy

Esinem wrote:

@Aidy " bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads...neither do motorcycles or cars"

Huh? So where does my road tax, fuel duty etc. go and who does pay for the roads?

It's good how motorcyclists come to bike forums and expect cyclists to listen to/support their issues whilst ensuring that they are well informed and ready to offer support for cyclists' issues, huh?

Or not.

You don't pay road tax, you pay VED. Upkeep of roads comes out of general taxation (read: council tax, which we all pay).

rjsterry

Esinem wrote:

@Aidy " bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads...neither do motorcycles or cars"

Huh? So where does my road tax, fuel duty etc. go and who does pay for the roads?

@Gordon861 Feckin' Porsche drivers, eh? I can say this having had two 944s

Oh please, I'm bored of typing this. We all pay for the roads through general taxation, so what you pay towards the roads depends largely on how much you earn, and what your house was worth 20-odd years ago.

(all together now) There's no such thing as Road Tax, it's VED. Needs a catchy tune or something.

Headhuunter

Esinem wrote:

@Aidy " bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads...neither do motorcycles or cars"

Huh? So where does my road tax, fuel duty etc. go and who does pay for the roads?

@Gordon861 Feckin' Porsche drivers, eh? I can say this having had two 944s

Typical motorist who thinks s/he owns the road because s/he pays "road tax". Your "road tax" does not pay for roads... It's VED, a tax on emmissions which bicycles don't create! We all pay for roads. I pay for roads and I don't own a car.

Porgy

Headhuunter wrote:

Esinem wrote:

@Aidy " bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads...neither do motorcycles or cars"

Huh? So where does my road tax, fuel duty etc. go and who does pay for the roads?

@Gordon861 Feckin' Porsche drivers, eh? I can say this having had two 944s

Typical motorist who thinks s/he owns the road because s/he pays "road tax". Your "road tax" does not pay for roads... It's VED, a tax on emmissions which bicycles don't create! We all pay for roads. I pay for roads and I don't own a car.

me too, annoying isn;t it? :evil:

spen666

Esinem wrote:

@Aidy " bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads...neither do motorcycles or cars"

Huh? So where does my road tax, fuel duty etc. go and who does pay for the roads?

@Gordon861 Feckin' Porsche drivers, eh? I can say this having had two 944s

The lunatics are allowed to use the computers today at the as
sylum?

Esinem

Thanks for all the sarcasm! However, a simple explanation would have sufficed. Thank you for correcting me. This is one of the great things about interacting with other groups, it can correct misnomers. I was totally unaware that my VED, to use the correct but less common or undertood term, and fuel duty etc. did not go towards the roads and has not done so since the 30's. Frankly, I'm appalled. Where the hell does it go?

BTW, I don't believe that I have ever claimed any greater right to the road than any other vehicle taxed or otherwise. I believe that is merely the prejudices of some who are clearly 'motorist', not that many drivers aren't just as 'cyclist'. In case you are puzzled, I have coined this new usage of the words to equate with 'racist'

However, I have pointed out that some might perceive any road user who does not get ripped off to the same degree as themselves as freeloaders, irrespective of the true facts. This is the argument put forward by 4-wheelers who feel bikers should pay to park just like they do. Soon it will be directed at cyclists and you will be next. All I propose is unity against a soon-to-be common enemy when you become the next cash cows. You seem to be falling into a false sense of security that it won't happen to you. The councils must be rubbing their hands in glee when they see those who could be allies squabbling and sniping.

W1

Porgy wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Esinem wrote:

@Aidy " bicycles dont pay towards the up keep of Britains roads...neither do motorcycles or cars"

Huh? So where does my road tax, fuel duty etc. go and who does pay for the roads?

@Gordon861 Feckin' Porsche drivers, eh? I can say this having had two 944s

Typical motorist who thinks s/he owns the road because s/he pays "road tax". Your "road tax" does not pay for roads... It's VED, a tax on emmissions which bicycles don't create! We all pay for roads. I pay for roads and I don't own a car.

me too, annoying isn;t it? :evil:

Why is it annoying? Do you exclusively cycle off roads? Do the goods you buy get delivered by horse and cart accross the fields?

W1

Esinem wrote:

Thanks for all the sarcasm! However, a simple explanation would have sufficed. Thank you for correcting me. This is one of the great things about interacting with other groups, it can correct misnomers. I was totally unaware that my VED, to use the correct but less common or undertood term, and fuel duty etc. did not go towards the roads and has not done so since the 30's. Frankly, I'm appalled. Where the hell does it go?

BTW, I don't believe that I have ever claimed any greater right to the road than any other vehicle taxed or otherwise. I believe that is merely the prejudices of some who are clearly 'motorist', not that many drivers aren't just as 'cyclist'. In case you are puzzled, I have coined this new usage of the words to equate with 'racist'

However, I have pointed out that some might perceive any road user who does not get ripped off to the same degree as themselves as freeloaders, irrespective of the true facts. This is the argument put forward by 4-wheelers who feel bikers should pay to park just like they do. Soon it will be directed at cyclists and you will be next. All I propose is unity against a soon-to-be common enemy when you become the next cash cows. You seem to be falling into a false sense of security that it won't happen to you. The councils must be rubbing their hands in glee when they see those who could be allies squabbling and sniping.

The problem with your argument is that (a) car drivers have no common body to protect their interests - cyclists do and (b) car drivers can be (fairly or unfairly) targetted on environmental grounds and made to pay more - cyclists are not in that position. In fact, as a "green" and austere form of transport, bikes will not face negative costs and regulations, as that would be political suicide in these current times. Finally (c) not that many people depend on cycling - so if the cost rises punitively, people will simply stop using them. That's not true for cars.

Headhuunter

As I said earlier, councils may wish ultimately to charge fior bike parking but I think this will be very hard to put into practice. If they install pay and display bike parking I will simply not use it. I'll chain my bike to the nearest railing, lampost etc. If they ban that and try to force ALL cyclists to use pay and display (or whatever system) parking then they will have to install a HELL of a lot of bike parking in London as in central areas, which Westminster encompasses, the main reason people lock their bikes on railings is because there simply isn't enough official bike parking to get anywhere near to satisfying demand. I frequently cannot park my bike in official bike racks near work in Chancery Lane and near my gym at Covent Garden, I often have to resort to using railings, trees etc whether I like it or not.

If they did ban locking bikes to lamposts etc and I did it anyway and they issued a parking fine, I would simply rip it up and cycle off. What they gonna do? My bike has no registration plate! For Westminster Council to set up a system of cycle registration and number plates, simply for bikes in or passing through WestminsterAND pay to install lots and lots more cycle parking the entire system would surely become unfeasible and prohibititively expensive.

Bike registration and reg plates have already been tried in a number of countries such as the Netherlands and Canada and ultimately scrapped as unworkable.

lost_in_thought

They're not going to charge cyclists for parking. We don't pollute, the Mayor has been pumping huge amounts of money into making cycling accessible, popular, increasing cycling in London.

He's hardly going to put a massive damper on it by then charging us, now, is he? Not to mention the logistics.

I have no problem whatsoever with motorbikes paying for parking. In fact, I think you should. I remember being surprised when I first moved down to London that you didn't. And that idiotic 'oh motorbikes have to park really close together' sticker? Like cars don't. Come on.

If it bothers you that much, buy a bicycle.

rjsterry

Esinem wrote:

Thanks for all the sarcasm! However, a simple explanation would have sufficed. Thank you for correcting me. This is one of the great things about interacting with other groups, it can correct misnomers. I was totally unaware that my VED, to use the correct but less common or undertood term, and fuel duty etc. did not go towards the roads and has not done so since the 30's. Frankly, I'm appalled. Where the hell does it go?

Well, the sarcasm is down to cyclists being a bit bored of the 'you don't pay road tax' nonsense - and of all the anti-cyclist arguments, it is probably the most nonsensical.

As for where your VED goes, it's not that it doesn't go on the roads, it's that it goes into the general 'pot' to be spent on everything, along with income tax, council tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, and so on. I don't know the figures, but I would guess that VED makes up a pretty small percentage of that total pot. So your VED goes on pretty much anything that the government spends money on.

BTW, I don't believe that I have ever claimed any greater right to the road than any other vehicle taxed or otherwise. I believe that is merely the prejudices of some who are clearly 'motorist', not that many drivers aren't just as 'cyclist'. In case you are puzzled, I have coined this new usage of the words to equate with 'racist'

Wouldn't that be cyclist-ist though?

However, I have pointed out that some might perceive any road user who does not get ripped off to the same degree as themselves as freeloaders, irrespective of the true facts. This is the argument put forward by 4-wheelers who feel bikers should pay to park just like they do. Soon it will be directed at cyclists and you will be next. All I propose is unity against a soon-to-be common enemy when you become the next cash cows. You seem to be falling into a false sense of security that it won't happen to you. The councils must be rubbing their hands in glee when they see those who could be allies squabbling and sniping.

Well, we've been round and round this one at length. I can see both sides: on the one hand, it would contradict completely the creation of the Cycle Superhighways, Cycle Hire Scheme and Boris's general push for more cycling in the capital, but I'm not sure I have faith in Westminster thinking in that 'joined-up' a way. I can also see that, if you were sold 'pay for parking => secure parking provided' and then the secure parking bit just got dropped, why that would seem like a bad deal.

el_presidente

Trafalgar Sq was completely gridlocked last night around 18.15, there were very few motorbikes in attendance, the traffic appeared to have seized itself up spontaneously. Plenty of motorbike cops around who were just looking on in bemusement.

Esinem

OK, let me address a few points. Some I have to repeat as some people don't appear to have seen those posts. Apologies to the others if I sound like a stuck record.

Firstly, the issue of obstruction/safety has been already raised in council meetings, e.g. blind/elderly people tripping over bicycles and kids poking their eyes out on levers/handlebars. This will be used to political advantage, i.e. if you agree with random pavement parking you are an evil person who hates kids and those with disabilities. You can't even park a motorbike in Westminster on private land anymore, unless it is fenced off! They stopped that one, then guess what? They solved the 'problem' by offering paid aprking. Genius! As I posted elsewhere, you are already paying for parking at some stations. They are discussing fees in terms of "acceptable tolerance levels", i.e. how much will they stand? OK, you get security for your money but let's face it, what main London street doesn't have CCTV and railings/lamposts or whatever to lock a bike to? WCC promised bikers security for their parking fees. Did we get it? Did we hell! Do you see a pattern emerging?

Secondly, they will simply remove/immobilise illegally parked cycles and charge you for return/release. No doubt this will be carried out by revenue hungry and target driven sub-contrators. No number plates required. Simples!

Thirdly, if cycling becomes too expensive, what's your alternative? Heavily taxed cars? Exhorbitant public transport? Matter transportation?! When you have somebody by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow as Cynthia Payne put it. I guess walking will remain free till they find a way to tax it.

Finally, pollution is not why they make the charges but it is a convenient way to sell the taxes. Like "we must protect the kids/disabled/elderly", if you disagree you are an uncaring and evil person. Make no mistake, this is about revenue to fill things like WCC's £22m budget deficit. We all know the state the ecomomy is in and the need to raise money for Bankers in Greed..erh, Need. What makes you think they won't seize every opportunity to put their hands in your pockets. Being Green is no exemption, your money is as good as anyone elses.

W1

Esinem wrote:

Being Green is no exemption, your money is as good as anyone elses.

Ball cocks I'm afraid - look at the CC and VED pricing for lower polluting cars.

W1

Esinem wrote:

Thirdly, if cycling becomes too expensive, what's your alternative? Heavily taxed cars? Exhorbitant public transport? Matter transportation?! When you have somebody by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow as Cynthia Payne put it. I guess walking will remain free till they find a way to tax it.

And on this point, yes, you find other forms of transport if one becomes too expensive. But why would they want to do that to cyclists? There is a push to take people out of cars and ease congestion on PT, cycling is being promoted to a massive degree - there will not suddently be a change in wind to disincentivise this, especially with the trendy "green" agenda and the sunk costs of cycling infrastructure and marketing.

Aidy

lost_in_thought wrote:

I have no problem whatsoever with motorbikes paying for parking. In fact, I think you should. I remember being surprised when I first moved down to London that you didn't. And that idiotic 'oh motorbikes have to park really close together' sticker? Like cars don't. Come on.

Quite.

I'm for it. Shall we start a campaign to support the charging of parking for motorcycles?

rjsterry

lost_in_thought wrote:

They're not going to charge cyclists for parking. We don't pollute, the Mayor has been pumping huge amounts of money into making cycling accessible, popular, increasing cycling in London.

He's hardly going to put a massive damper on it by then charging us, now, is he? Not to mention the logistics.

As I've said, I know it's completely contradictory to the Mayor's policies, and I don't think Boris would approve, but I'm too cynical to believe that someone in WCC hasn't at least floated the idea of charging for cycle parking.[/quote]

gordon861

Just want to make a comment on the bikes not paying Road Tax/VED bit.

When I used to cycle, whenever we heard that argument we'd normally point out that most bike riders also drive cars, so they do pay it they are just using a pushbike at this moment instead of their car.

rjsterry - I think you can almost guarantee that someone has a plan to do something like this in the future, they just need a crack to appear that they can wedge the idea into. I expect it'll be residents complaining about falling over pushbikes locked to all railings and lamp posts, and then WCC will decide that they need to crack down on these 'rogue' cyclists so they will force you to use their parking areas. Also with the BorisBikes coming soon WCC will have to 'manage demand' for cycle facilities within its area and a fee would do that. Add to this the fact that they have already started painting the cyclist as the bad guy in the press with all the red light jumping and riding on the pavement, and finally the fact that WCC are already talking about taking more powers away from the Police so that their own contractors can start enforcing them instead. Something is going to change for the worse soon.

iPayRoadTax.com

Fantastic to see Esinem seeing the light on his personal Road (Tax) to Damascus.

More info for him and others newly discovering 'road tax' isn't a tax on roads but a tax on emissions:

'Road tax', abolished in 1937, is a loaded term, in some mouths even perjorative: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9Fyj2GMxgo

The end of 'road tax' (1909-1937) was started by Winston Churchill in 1926. The oddly fascinating history of 'road tax' can be found at http://ipayroadtax.com/?p=54

Why licensing cyclists is a bad idea: http://ipayroadtax.com/?p=85

There are millions of tax-dodgers out there (disabled drivers, the Queen, US servicemen in the UK, police cars, farm tractors...): http://ipayroadtax.com/?p=236

Subsidies for cyclists: http://ipayroadtax.com/?p=50

mybreakfastconsisted

Your blog picked up that disgusting BBC Look East report about cyclists, roadtax.

Well done!

iPayRoadTax.com

Thanks. Yep, Look East even sort of apologised.

Mind you, ITV's Tonight programme made similar mistakes last week and has yet to fess up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-Cw5QSVQbs

http://ipayroadtax.com/?p=433

Esinem

I came here to deliver a message, which I believe I have done. Over half a century, I have observed changes and have discerned a pattern of how things work. I see little point in arguing further with those who wish to bury their heads in the sand as we are beginning top repeat ourselves. I'd bet money I'm right. Time will tell. If the powers that be wish to discourage congestion, why put up public transport costs in London by around 20% in a year? Is that to drive people onto bicycles? I doubt it.

Bicycles are certainly a large part of the answer to congestion but they are not a practical alternative for everyone or every journey. Practical and affordable travel is essential and should not just be the preserve of the rich or priveledged, e.g. WCC counsellors with free parking permits.

I'll be back in a year or two to say "Told you so!" and maybe "Do you need a hand from the bikers fighting it?". Meanwhile, read this again and digest it:

Make no mistake, this is about revenue to fill things like WCC's £22m budget deficit. We all know the state the ecomomy is in and the need to raise money for Bankers in Greed..erh, Need.

Aidy

Esinem wrote:

I came here to deliver a message, which I believe I have done. Over half a century, I have observed changes and have discerned a pattern of how things work. I see little point in arguing further with those who wish to bury their heads in the sand as we are beginning top repeat ourselves. I'd bet money I'm right. Time will tell. If the powers that be wish to discourage congestion, why put up public transport costs in London by around 20% in a year? Is that to drive people onto bicycles? I doubt it.

Bicycles are certainly a large part of the answer to congestion but they are not a practical alternative for everyone or every journey. Practical and affordable travel is essential and should not just be the preserve of the rich or priveledged, e.g. WCC counsellors with free parking permits.

I'll be back in a year or two to say "Told you so!" and maybe "Do you need a hand from the bikers fighting it?". Meanwhile, read this again and digest it:

Make no mistake, this is about revenue to fill things like WCC's £22m budget deficit. We all know the state the ecomomy is in and the need to raise money for Bankers in Greed..erh, Need.

I'll take that bet. A year, two?

Esinem

Aidy wrote:

I'll take that bet. A year, two?

On success or the attempt?

lost_in_thought

For starters, it wasn't the bankers.

Anyway, esinem, state your timeframe and wager - and yes, on success. Like the successful bike parking 'tax'.

tgotb

Esinem wrote:

If the powers that be wish to discourage congestion, why put up public transport costs in London by around 20% in a year? Is that to drive people onto bicycles? I doubt it.

To cover the cost of providing that transport, maybe?

Esinem wrote:

Bicycles are certainly a large part of the answer to congestion but they are not a practical alternative for everyone or every journey. Practical and affordable travel is essential and should not just be the preserve of the rich or priveledged, e.g. WCC counsellors with free parking permits.

I'm not sure that motorcycles provide a "practical and afordable" alternative either, especially for those who are not "rich and privileged". A very large proportion of the motorbikes I see on my daily commute are worth more than my car, and a year's commuting on one would cost me the same in fuel alone as the outright cost of my bicycle. Most of the potential barriers to cycling (not owning a bike, not having anywhere to store a bike, not wanting to get wet and cold, perceived risk of injury) also apply to motorcycles, in some cases to a greater extent.

Esinem wrote:

Make no mistake, this is about revenue to fill things like WCC's £22m budget deficit. We all know the state the ecomomy is in and the need to raise money for Bankers in Greed..erh, Need.

This is an interesting comment, which leaves me with a couple of questions:
1. You accept that the economy is not in a great state, and presumably that something needs to be done, so long as "someone else" foots the bill. In the case of WCC, who do you think this "someone else" should be?
2.You seem to think that WCC's budget deficit is a result of bailing out banks. I don't remember reading about that in the papers, please explain...