Cars, cars, cars...
Comments
-
Rick - my comment about anywhere, is any small city. FS really does not need to be concentrated where it is. All those jobs could be done in any city in the UK. The trading is all done electronically, there are no old skool trading floors, thus removing the need to all be huddled together.
RJST - again, my point is that had the rest of the country had anything close to the money spent on infrastructure that London has benefitted from, then the centralisation to London would not have occured and the rest of the country would have benefitted.0 -
[coughs] You missed the word in bold.pblakeney said:
The car on the right is light because it doesn't have all that "stuff".pinno said:
How do you stuff Blue tooth, air bags, side impact protection bars, crumple zones, electric seats, sound proofing, 5 speed gearboxes, a decent size engine and everything that makes driving sanitised, quiet virtual reality into the car on the right?!photonic69 said:
I see your picture and raise you....
(Mini Cooper Countryman subcompact - one was parked outside my house and I almost puked. No way was it by any means a Mini. How very dare they!)
As a result it doesn't need a bigger engine and the handling is a hoot!seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
-
I knew you were being sarcastic. People who haven't driven them will not be aware.pinno said:
[coughs] You missed the word in bold.pblakeney said:
The car on the right is light because it doesn't have all that "stuff".pinno said:
How do you stuff Blue tooth, air bags, side impact protection bars, crumple zones, electric seats, sound proofing, 5 speed gearboxes, a decent size engine and everything that makes driving sanitised, quiet virtual reality into the car on the right?!photonic69 said:
I see your picture and raise you....
(Mini Cooper Countryman subcompact - one was parked outside my house and I almost puked. No way was it by any means a Mini. How very dare they!)
As a result it doesn't need a bigger engine and the handling is a hoot!The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Making money off the back of all the real work being done in the areas that subsequently got dumped on once they stopped being useful (and the exploitation of all those primitive foreign lands).rjsterry said:
This is hilarious. As if London wasn't the capital city of a global empire that lasted for centuries. If other places want more investment and to become the centre for this or that they need to attract that investment instead of endlessly moaning about things being too centralised.Dorset_Boy said:
In 2022, there really is very little reason for financial services, legal services, accountancy services etc to be based in major urban centres. They can be done anywhere. There are plenty of truly excellent financial services companies that are not based in London, and are far more profitable and better businesses for it. A huge amont of the work invloved is not face to face with clients / customers stuff.rjsterry said:
London and the SE aren't awful. They're great. If you are going to build an economy around Finance and other services, it's likely to be focused around major urban centres. This will sound harsh but insisting unconnected industries relocate to places that only exist because of historic presence of raw materials is a hiding to nothing. Let them go the way of the abandoned medieval villages and start afresh where the work is.First.Aspect said:
How is thst working out?rjsterry said:
Thank you, comrade. So that's agreed we will allocate 10,000 employment contracts to Tyneside. The ministry will be in touch later to allocate roles to these contracts.First.Aspect said:
Wrong way around. Build the jobs where people live. The UK is already suffering because London is a bottleneck. We are one of the most centralised countries in Europe. This isn't a good thing.rick_chasey said:
Yeah, part of it is loosening up the house-building market so we can build houses where the jobs are.pblakeney said:Basically speaking the government/councils need to subsidise unprofitable PT routes. Privatisation alone will never work.
Then make using cars cost prohibitive. This will be seen as a tax on the poor and workers so will not fly.
What would help most is if people could find cost neutral, career equal, jobs close to home*. Top salary might be lost but that can be offset by travel savings both in money and time.
*This is based on a theory that there are people travelling from town A to work in town B while others are doing the reverse for the same jobs.
More seriously, development (housing and commercial property) has always followed employment, not the other way around.
Its an age old problem, but providing incentives for businesses to locate in different regions is a known thing.
Focusing solely on making London and the SE less awful or even more connected from even further away seems like being in a hole and frantically digging to me.
Any one been to Manchester recently? Seems to be working there.
It would be far better for the country if all the focus for the last 25 years hadn't been on London, and the whole country would be wealthier as a result.
I’m starting to sound like a proper Leftie, I’ll be joining a Union at this rate!0 -
Pssst - London isn't central.... it's stuck in the bottom right hand corner, and given Brexit, it's not much help it being there near the EU at the moment. Pretty heavy population density further north west... if I remember rightly, there are 20m people within an hour's drive of the Peak District.0
-
I think London has been the centre since before there even was a United Kingdom. Most of the infrastructure is Victorian and was built as a commercial venture. If there is public spending on maintaining that infrastructure, that's because the revenue is there and so is the population.Dorset_Boy said:Rick - my comment about anywhere, is any small city. FS really does not need to be concentrated where it is. All those jobs could be done in any city in the UK. The trading is all done electronically, there are no old skool trading floors, thus removing the need to all be huddled together.
RJST - again, my point is that had the rest of the country had anything close to the money spent on infrastructure that London has benefitted from, then the centralisation to London would not have occured and the rest of the country would have benefitted.
FS can of course be decentralised, so why isn't it (more so)? You've already said it isn't reliant on infrastructure the way it used to be.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
None of them are ambitious though.briantrumpet said:Pssst - London isn't central.... it's stuck in the bottom right hand corner, and given Brexit, it's not much help it being there near the EU at the moment. Pretty heavy population density further north west... if I remember rightly, there are 20m people within an hour's drive of the Peak District.
0 -
.pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
Well, you didn't like me starting this one, and now it's 55 pages long... I might try selling it for $44bn to a genius...0 -
FS outside of retail banking and insurance is one of the most geographically centralised industries around.rjsterry said:
I think London has been the centre since before there even was a United Kingdom. Most of the infrastructure is Victorian and was built as a commercial venture. If there is public spending on maintaining that infrastructure, that's because the revenue is there and so is the population.Dorset_Boy said:Rick - my comment about anywhere, is any small city. FS really does not need to be concentrated where it is. All those jobs could be done in any city in the UK. The trading is all done electronically, there are no old skool trading floors, thus removing the need to all be huddled together.
RJST - again, my point is that had the rest of the country had anything close to the money spent on infrastructure that London has benefitted from, then the centralisation to London would not have occured and the rest of the country would have benefitted.
FS can of course be decentralised, so why isn't it (more so)? You've already said it isn't reliant on infrastructure the way it used to be.
Why do we think that is?
0 -
rick_chasey said:
FS outside of retail banking and insurance is one of the most geographically centralised industries around.rjsterry said:
I think London has been the centre since before there even was a United Kingdom. Most of the infrastructure is Victorian and was built as a commercial venture. If there is public spending on maintaining that infrastructure, that's because the revenue is there and so is the population.Dorset_Boy said:Rick - my comment about anywhere, is any small city. FS really does not need to be concentrated where it is. All those jobs could be done in any city in the UK. The trading is all done electronically, there are no old skool trading floors, thus removing the need to all be huddled together.
RJST - again, my point is that had the rest of the country had anything close to the money spent on infrastructure that London has benefitted from, then the centralisation to London would not have occured and the rest of the country would have benefitted.
FS can of course be decentralised, so why isn't it (more so)? You've already said it isn't reliant on infrastructure the way it used to be.
Why do we think that is?
Because they are stuck in old habits, and enjoy socialising together in places with lots of entertainment options?2 -
It’s a trust thing. It’s much harder to trust people with your money you haven’t met.
If you ask FS sales people what happened in the pandemic, they’ll all tell the same story: repeat business with existing clients & relationships and virtually no new business form people you hadn’t met.
It was stasis.0 -
I think we do need a new thread to quarantine the tedious non car discussion that seems to have take root in here...pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
Yep, Chr1st, let's have at least one virtually fun thread.Stevo_666 said:
I think we do need a new thread to quarantine the tedious non car discussion that seems to have take root in here...pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
1 -
With that sort of money, you would be bored.briantrumpet said:.
pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
Well, you didn't like me starting this one, and now it's 55 pages long... I might try selling it for $44bn to a genius...seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Fun threads quickly get knotted up by the cardigans.focuszing723 said:
Yep, Chr1st, let's have at least one virtually fun thread.Stevo_666 said:
I think we do need a new thread to quarantine the tedious non car discussion that seems to have take root in here...pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
seanoconn - gruagach craic!1 -
This is factually incorrect.pinno said:
Fun threads quickly get knotted up by the cardigans.focuszing723 said:
Yep, Chr1st, let's have at least one virtually fun thread.Stevo_666 said:
I think we do need a new thread to quarantine the tedious non car discussion that seems to have take root in here...pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
0 -
I like that Pinno:)pinno said:
Fun threads quickly get knotted up by the cardigans.focuszing723 said:
Yep, Chr1st, let's have at least one virtually fun thread.Stevo_666 said:
I think we do need a new thread to quarantine the tedious non car discussion that seems to have take root in here...pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
0 -
OK - what sports car would you have that you could use as an everyday driver given the current state of British roads? I can think of a few that are suited to smooth tarmac but would be spine destroying to drive everyday.
Sometimes. Maybe. Possibly.
0 -
I've just realised your name is photonic not photonic.
For me a porsche 997 carrera 41 -
Yes, I'm often mistaken!shirley_basso said:I've just realised your name is photonic not photonic.
For me a porsche 997 carrera 4
Good choice. My mate has a 996 4S Cab. Lovely car. Stupidly quick. Grips like a limpet. It's getting on a bit now. 18 years old. He keeps me updated on the fortnightly garage trips for various repairs. His pockets are a lot deeper than mine. He does use it as a daily driver too.Sometimes. Maybe. Possibly.
0 -
Not sure I would want a Cab - definitely Coupe
As for the name - I kept reading it photo-nic[k]0 -
Why the 4 and not the 2?shirley_basso said:I've just realised your name is photonic not photonic.
For me a porsche 997 carrera 4
4 wheel drive 997's are all wrong. If the thought of a rear engine, 2 wheel drive 911 is daunting, then don't buy one unless you go to a track and get some instruction or 2 things will happen - it will kill you or you'll end up driving it like grandma which defeats the whole purpose.
The 4, whilst giving you that extra traction, means the difference of 20-30 mph going into and out of a bend. So you're only going quicker which lulls you into a false sense of security and propelling you even faster towards bending the thing whilst spinning on a patch of diesel. You cannot ease off the throttle and jump on the brake half way round a bend easily.
The more up to date 992 or 991's with 4 wheel drive is standard but they are pricey and they have to have 4 wheel drive because of the power output.
The speed at which you can push the 997 round a good curve is astonishing but I can easily exceed the speed limit in a matter of seconds. Therefore, you are on the edge of a speeding ticket doing normal driving and if you haven't got access to a track, then you are only ever going to drive the thing at 40%. You'll never get that feeling of handling and cornering which will amaze you but you have to know what to do and when to apply the power (before you even turn the car in to a bend). This is counter intuitive and if you haven't got the balls, a complete waste of time owning one.
When thinking about a sports car - you do not have to have power to have fun.
The 911 in whatever guise is too powerful to have fun legally.
997 - Bit rigid for our lovely roads unfortunately.
Also, my 911 was returning 16mpg for urban driving.
996 for bargain basement and great performance.
993 for the best of the best.
964 - the funeral directors dream machine.
Cayman - great value but you have to sift through the dross.
None of the above really suitable for daily driving though with current fuel costs (and comfort).
I would suggest the BMW M sport 3-series F30 335i petrol* or for slightly better daily economy, the oil burning version.
*Faster than my 997 0-60 and is speed limited to 155 which can easily be re-programmed (if you would actually want/need to).
You can play with the suspension settings for daily use and for tracking or some trip down to Nice via the autobahn.
You can also fit your bike in the boot.
Older E46 M3 ?seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Probably right, Pinno. Maybe the 2 S then. 996 has doubled in price over last 2 years (as long as I've been looking).
perhaps a merc SL
I have an estate for all the other stuff.0 -
Personal preference but I'd consider the SL as a grand tourer, not a sports car. Probably better to use day to day though. As ever the MX-5 is probably the real world answer.shirley_basso said:Probably right, Pinno. Maybe the 2 S then. 996 has doubled in price over last 2 years (as long as I've been looking).
perhaps a merc SL
I have an estate for all the other stuff.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
pinno said:
Fun threads quickly get knotted up by the cardigans.focuszing723 said:
Yep, Chr1st, let's have at least one virtually fun thread.Stevo_666 said:
I think we do need a new thread to quarantine the tedious non car discussion that seems to have take root in here...pinno said:
No pleeeeease...briantrumpet said:I almost feel a new thread coming on...
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
My ideal Sports Car as a daily driver would probably be an Audi RS4 Avant. Fast and I can get a bike in the back. Win-win.
Sometimes. Maybe. Possibly.
1 -
Being cheap, small, light and agile myself I always thought I'd like something cheap, small, light and agile like an MX5 or a lotus Elise.
But as I near the point I'm considering taking a tax-free lump sum from a pension I realise
a) the financial landscape is looking increasingly $h1t, pension pots are shrinking and we may need the money for boring stuff like food and heating and
b) I've become one of the old codgers I've always derided for looking rather sad driving a sports car.0 -
Do NOT get a Lotus Elise if you value your fillings/back. The ride is harsh. Last went in one 12 years ago when I percieve the roads to be slightly better than they are now. After 30 minutes I really wanted to get out. It was unpleasant. Fine for a trackday car but not as a daily driver.Munsford0 said:Being cheap, small, light and agile myself I always thought I'd like something cheap, small, light and agile like an MX5 or a lotus Elise.
But as I near the point I'm considering taking a tax-free lump sum from a pension I realise
a) the financial landscape is looking increasingly $h1t, pension pots are shrinking and we may need the money for boring stuff like food and heating and
b) I've become one of the old codgers I've always derided for looking rather sad driving a sports car.Sometimes. Maybe. Possibly.
0
