The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

First.Aspect said:

kingstongraham said:

First.Aspect said:

kingstongraham said:

First.Aspect said:

Please let me know if you can devise a more counter productive tax concept.

Following your "logic", a progressive income tax?

Look up "Scotland" online. Already done, and it is not only more progressive, it is simply more.

At £50k, a taxpayer already pays about £130 more each month than in England. Under the new plans that would be more like £150 a month, which most people would notice.

I'm assuming you understand that there has been a progressive income tax in the UK since before it was the UK. The USA has had one since 1862. Etc.

I'm just pointing out that according to your "logic" relating to a wealth tax being counter productive, any progressive income tax would deter people from wanting to earn more?

But that's a bit off topic for here, and should probably be on a different thread.

Agreed, on both points. It presumes that tax should rise per se, of course, which I'm not sure about.

KG's line does seem to be a subtle version of the old leftie knee jerk position of 'more tax = good' (provided someone else pays).

You do understand what a progressive income tax is?

Everyone understands.

If we accept that the energy transition to a low carbon economy is inevitable, because of the perils of climate change, then you need to look at that transition. This thread is really about the travel aspect, which makes up a big portion of emissions.

Ultimately the transition needs to be paid for, through whatever mechanisms you want.

The reality is a lot of that investment required will have to come from the state sector.

What do you propose is the solution is to pay for this investment if it's not more taxes?

The increase will help pay for more childcare.

Internet. Population of Scotland is 37 times greater than Cambridge. You really should be more informed.

If I can have half a clue about issues in London, Manchester or the SW, I'm sure you could have half a clue about the 32% of Britain north of the end of your nose.

I won’t lie, I’m not following the argument here.

Indeed, I'm reflecting some of the nonsense you've put forward. Such as, London has twice the population of Scotland. Relevance?

And you can't see far beyond your own life experience RC, this much is abundantly clear. It isn't just an entire country you dismiss, its everywhere other than Cambridge, the rail line to your workplace in the centre of the universe, and your bank account.

rick_chasey

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

pblakeney

pinno said:

*Converted for PB.

Boo!

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

20% of the population is quite a big minority. If that's a population small enough to discount as collateral, I wouldn't want to live in Ricktopia. It would be like animal farm. (not the movie).

And well done for using google.

pinno

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/key-findings-statistical-digest-of-rural-england/key-findings-statistical-digest-of-rural-england

85% of the land area in the UK is classed as 'rural'.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/591462/RUCOA_leaflet_Jan2017.pdf

I don't know where you get your stats from.

rick_chasey

Come on Pino. First line in the second link you gave.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

It doesn't need to be a metropolis to have functioning public transport. Obviously in somewhere like Kent or Surrey private cars will need to play a bigger role than in a city with an integrated network but it's not the Outer Hebrides.

There's a very clear summary of the economics of running a non-London bus service here for anyone that's interested.

https://www.sweco.co.uk/insights/blog/bus-operator-viability/

pinno

rick_chasey said:

Come on Pino. First line in the second link you gave.

"...over 80% of Britain is it urbanised..."

Vague statement.

First.Aspect

pinno said:

rick_chasey said:

Come on Pino. First line in the second link you gave.

"...over 80% of Britain is it urbanised..."

Vague statement.

1 in 5 Britons feel marginalised by recruiters, poll finds.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

It doesn't need to be a metropolis to have functioning public transport. Obviously in somewhere like Kent or Surrey private cars will need to play a bigger role than in a city with an integrated network but it's not the Outer Hebrides.

There's a very clear summary of the economics of running a non-London bus service here for anyone that's interested.

https://www.sweco.co.uk/insights/blog/bus-operator-viability/

But as mentioned above, they don't need trams or tubes. Rick is seemingly treating all urban areas as the same where clearly that is not the case. My home town had a population of about 25,000 and got by fine with some bus services and couple of train stops to complement car transport.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

It doesn't need to be a metropolis to have functioning public transport. Obviously in somewhere like Kent or Surrey private cars will need to play a bigger role than in a city with an integrated network but it's not the Outer Hebrides.

There's a very clear summary of the economics of running a non-London bus service here for anyone that's interested.

https://www.sweco.co.uk/insights/blog/bus-operator-viability/

But as mentioned above, they don't need trams or tubes. Rick is seemingly treating all urban areas as the same where clearly that is not the case. My home town had a population of about 25,000 and got by fine with some bus services and couple of train stops to complement car transport.

Mostly walking in a place that size, I assume.

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

It doesn't need to be a metropolis to have functioning public transport. Obviously in somewhere like Kent or Surrey private cars will need to play a bigger role than in a city with an integrated network but it's not the Outer Hebrides.

There's a very clear summary of the economics of running a non-London bus service here for anyone that's interested.

https://www.sweco.co.uk/insights/blog/bus-operator-viability/

But as mentioned above, they don't need trams or tubes. Rick is seemingly treating all urban areas as the same where clearly that is not the case. My home town had a population of about 25,000 and got by fine with some bus services and couple of train stops to complement car transport.

I’ve never said it must be trams and tubes.

Certainly don’t need that in Cambridge (though they did make use of the disused railway to make guided busway work debatable success) - which is a largish town surrounded by proper countryside (which is why it’s a helpful yardstick. Lots of room for towns to be much more cycle and pedestrian friendly)

briantrumpet

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

It doesn't need to be a metropolis to have functioning public transport. Obviously in somewhere like Kent or Surrey private cars will need to play a bigger role than in a city with an integrated network but it's not the Outer Hebrides.

There's a very clear summary of the economics of running a non-London bus service here for anyone that's interested.

https://www.sweco.co.uk/insights/blog/bus-operator-viability/

But as mentioned above, they don't need trams or tubes. Rick is seemingly treating all urban areas as the same where clearly that is not the case. My home town had a population of about 25,000 and got by fine with some bus services and couple of train stops to complement car transport.

Mostly walking in a place that size, I assume.

Or maybe, I dunno, even cycling.

It did actually cheer me up cycling my last leg on my return from the bus stop to home on Thursday the number of people on bikes after dark in random places on the outskirts of Exeter.

pinno

First.Aspect said:

pinno said:

rick_chasey said:

Come on Pino. First line in the second link you gave.

"...over 80% of Britain is it urbanised..."

Vague statement.

1 in 5 Britons feel marginalised by recruiters, poll finds.

This presentation of the statistic I find entirely correct though it really needs a graph.

First.Aspect

Dorset_Boy

First.Aspect said:

pinno said:

rick_chasey said:

Come on Pino. First line in the second link you gave.

"...over 80% of Britain is it urbanised..."

Vague statement.

1 in 5 Britons feel marginalised by recruiters, poll finds.

More like 4 in 5

First.Aspect

Dorset_Boy said:

First.Aspect said:

pinno said:

rick_chasey said:

Come on Pino. First line in the second link you gave.

"...over 80% of Britain is it urbanised..."

Vague statement.

1 in 5 Britons feel marginalised by recruiters, poll finds.

More like 4 in 5

Ah yes, the blue can be the unambitious non Londoners.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

It doesn't need to be a metropolis to have functioning public transport. Obviously in somewhere like Kent or Surrey private cars will need to play a bigger role than in a city with an integrated network but it's not the Outer Hebrides.

There's a very clear summary of the economics of running a non-London bus service here for anyone that's interested.

https://www.sweco.co.uk/insights/blog/bus-operator-viability/

But as mentioned above, they don't need trams or tubes. Rick is seemingly treating all urban areas as the same where clearly that is not the case. My home town had a population of about 25,000 and got by fine with some bus services and couple of train stops to complement car transport.

Mostly walking in a place that size, I assume.

It was small enough for that to be a good option.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

I do get more bites when I refer to my own experience then post stats like “over 80% of Britain is it urbanised”.

When I use those stats I’m told I’m not considering the minority enough.

When I use my own experience to illustrate, I’m told that it’s not representative.

Which is it?

I've already explained upthread why the term urban is misleading as it includes any town with a population over 10,000. Hardly the metropolises that you would have us believe.

It doesn't need to be a metropolis to have functioning public transport. Obviously in somewhere like Kent or Surrey private cars will need to play a bigger role than in a city with an integrated network but it's not the Outer Hebrides.

There's a very clear summary of the economics of running a non-London bus service here for anyone that's interested.

https://www.sweco.co.uk/insights/blog/bus-operator-viability/

But as mentioned above, they don't need trams or tubes. Rick is seemingly treating all urban areas as the same where clearly that is not the case. My home town had a population of about 25,000 and got by fine with some bus services and couple of train stops to complement car transport.

No. A Guildford underground would be absurd. Having said that I've just read that the north-east Surrey Boroughs have been talking to TfL about extending the tram network westwards.

katani

I live in one with just over 12k residents with everything one needs within a walking distance including a shopping centre with supermarkets, post office, cafes, lunch places etc., a train station in the middle of the place with a stopper service that takes you to the neighbouring 200k population town within 5 mins.. and fast trains to Manchester and Liverpool taking approx. 20 mins. Those weren't reliable at all pre-covid with cancellations being daily the norm, so I preferred to either drive to work, with my employer being very pro-motoring providing company cars including for private use and paying our parking fees, or cycle, the 14 miles, even though the route is a bit bumpy at places.

So with all this convenience of living in a small settlement with everything you need in a walking distance, guess what the preferred mode of transport for getting around is.
And it is not only ours like that obviously. The other surrounding small villages are basically f*ng cars everywhere you look. I mean the locals drive to the McD drive through at the shopping centre and now Costa have opened their won drive through at the local cafe.
My running buddy lives some 500m from his office building, yet, I see his car in the office car park regularly. He will also come to our Sunday run meeting point at the shopping centre car park in his car. My next door neighbour regularly asks me if I need a lift when he sees me go out for a walk at lunchtime. They once almost came to kicking my front door down, because he came to let me know a courier left my parcel at theirs, but I wasn't coming to the door, but my car was on the drive so he thought something must have happened to me and I needed help. Never crossed his mind I may have likely been taking a journey on the shoe lace express, even though he had been seeing me doing so daily in the past 7 years I lived at that place. Still confuses the sh*t out of them every time lol. And blows my mind that they can be that way each time. If it wasn't for the fact almost everyone in the village owns a dog which needs walking (though dog walking businesses are doing fairly well too) and the actual shopping which must be done on foot as driving into Asda and between the aisles is not permitted, they wouldn't be using their legs at all.

London may have been a success for cycling, but that's simply because those have had no other choice. If it was viable they bar a few cycling fanatics would drive places.

briantrumpet

So much for the 'woke mind virus', it's the 'car brain virus' which has been one of the most successful such 'viruses'... pragmatism and environmental concerns disappear once the car key is hanging by the front door.

focuszing723

First.Aspect said:

What does the red and blue represent?

First.Aspect

focuszing723 said:

First.Aspect said:

What does the red and blue represent?

Anything you want.

The beauty of the 80:20 rule is that no matter what you attribute to it isn't going to be far off.

pinno

focuszing723 said:

First.Aspect said:

What does the red and blue represent?

It's like this: if you have a family of 5...

rjsterry

Vintage top deck action.

davebradswmb

The Guaridan Tame wide roads and replace them with boulevards of homes create streets

Pross

I'm amazed that took a think tank, it's quite commonplace in new build already.

Stevo_666

davebradswmb said:

The Guaridan Tame wide roads and replace them with boulevards of homes create streets

What's the Guaridan?

kingstongraham

davebradswmb said:

The Guaridan Tame wide roads and replace them with boulevards of homes create streets

I like the plan to get rid of all the junctions that are designed to allow cars to go too fast.