Emission Based Congestion Charge
09 April 2008, 11:12 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Egham
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emission Based Congestion Charge
Last edited by gar; 09 April 2008 at 11:18 PM.
10 April 2008, 07:58 AM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now there is a shocker!
I dont think its actually the charge itself taking the levels up, but the underhanded changes to the roads and signals slowing everything down to JUSTIFY the CC.
Not that that will change anything of course. All that will do is support the restructuring of the pricing.
I dont think its actually the charge itself taking the levels up, but the underhanded changes to the roads and signals slowing everything down to JUSTIFY the CC.
Not that that will change anything of course. All that will do is support the restructuring of the pricing.
10 April 2008, 08:25 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to Ken, and get rid of him. Not that its going to reverse the CC, but might slow the rip off down, and maybe even get the traffic moving how it could.
10 April 2008, 08:35 AM
#5
now if he can scrap any further charges, get rid of the bendy buses, change the traffic light sequence, fine the ****ing roadwork companies for being late, then maybe, just maye, we may get the traffic flowing again..
10 April 2008, 10:32 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole business is purely for making money of course as well as screwing the hated motorist as far as he can. These lefty prats jump in with all these starry initiatives without having ever thought the consequences through, not that they care anyway!
I wonder why these smart **** people have to ruin our language by making up these strange words. Could hardly believe the word "disbenefit" for goodness sake! The use of the word "non" is far nearer to correct English.
Les
I wonder why these smart **** people have to ruin our language by making up these strange words. Could hardly believe the word "disbenefit" for goodness sake! The use of the word "non" is far nearer to correct English.
Les
10 April 2008, 11:04 AM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
As for the 'tfl not publishing the report' - smacks of the way Ken won't publish the report into motorcycles in bus lanes - which show a 42% reduction in all casualties, spread out amongst ALL road users, if they are allowed to use them. This doesn't fit with his ideas for getting everyone off of private transport. And it would help congestion ...
Dave
Trending Topics
10 April 2008, 11:50 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Using models to assess the impact of the new charge on emissions, the report's finds a "very high disbenefit" is predicted, ......" They mean, Les, that there will be 'no benefit' ...... which would be correct English - but if they wrote in correct English we'd all be able to see through their little schemes .. Or it could just mean that the author had a 'recent' education. i.e. a very poor one.
As for the 'tfl not publishing the report' - smacks of the way Ken won't publish the report into motorcycles in bus lanes - which show a 42% reduction in all casualties, spread out amongst ALL road users, if they are allowed to use them. This doesn't fit with his ideas for getting everyone off of private transport. And it would help congestion ...
Dave
As for the 'tfl not publishing the report' - smacks of the way Ken won't publish the report into motorcycles in bus lanes - which show a 42% reduction in all casualties, spread out amongst ALL road users, if they are allowed to use them. This doesn't fit with his ideas for getting everyone off of private transport. And it would help congestion ...
Dave
Les
10 April 2008, 12:04 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole business is purely for making money of course as well as screwing the hated motorist as far as he can. These lefty prats jump in with all these starry initiatives without having ever thought the consequences through, not that they care anyway!
I wonder why these smart **** people have to ruin our language by making up these strange words. Could hardly believe the word "disbenefit" for goodness sake! The use of the word "non" is far nearer to correct English.
Les
I wonder why these smart **** people have to ruin our language by making up these strange words. Could hardly believe the word "disbenefit" for goodness sake! The use of the word "non" is far nearer to correct English.
Les
Originally Posted by hutton_d
"Using models to assess the impact of the new charge on emissions, the report's finds a "very high disbenefit" is predicted, ......" They mean, Les, that there will be 'no benefit' ...... which would be correct English - but if they wrote in correct English we'd all be able to see through their little schemes .. Or it could just mean that the author had a 'recent' education. i.e. a very poor one.
Disbenefit is a perfectly proper word.
"no" benefit implies neither an advantage nor disavantage
"Disbenefit" means that something was supposed to have a benefit - infact, has the exact opposite effect - I.e. something that was supposed to reduce emissions, infact, creates more emissions - Hence "Disbenefit"
Bloody illiterates
10 April 2008, 12:05 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: S.E London
Posts: 13,654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
true, boris has already intoned in his manifesto and guidelines that he is in favour of keeping the CC (who wouldnt when you see the money coming in) but would relax the payment times and get rid of the fining system.
now if he can scrap any further charges, get rid of the bendy buses, change the traffic light sequence, fine the ****ing roadwork companies for being late, then maybe, just maye, we may get the traffic flowing again..
now if he can scrap any further charges, get rid of the bendy buses, change the traffic light sequence, fine the ****ing roadwork companies for being late, then maybe, just maye, we may get the traffic flowing again..
Also making CC subscription possible as done in other countries, with monthly billing etc.
All in all its the most positive thing I seen proposed for traffic in a long time. And as people keep saying. There is no point saying, I dont live in London, its does not affect me, au contrair, once the London CC starts to spread... it will be road pricing but under a different banner
Also is the reopening of the blackwall tunnel tidal flow..Cant wait for that one!
10 April 2008, 12:59 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all Hilary Clinton speak now..........
I've spoken to several people at TfL and they are pretty hopeless. Common sense doesn't appear in their agenda. They are mostly bogged down in Euro emission regulation which is mostly over their heads it seems (and mine to some extent) dl
I've spoken to several people at TfL and they are pretty hopeless. Common sense doesn't appear in their agenda. They are mostly bogged down in Euro emission regulation which is mostly over their heads it seems (and mine to some extent
) dl
10 April 2008, 01:31 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Egham
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
true, boris has already intoned in his manifesto and guidelines that he is in favour of keeping the CC (who wouldnt when you see the money coming in) but would relax the payment times and get rid of the fining system.
now if he can scrap any further charges, get rid of the bendy buses, change the traffic light sequence, fine the ****ing roadwork companies for being late, then maybe, just maye, we may get the traffic flowing again..
now if he can scrap any further charges, get rid of the bendy buses, change the traffic light sequence, fine the ****ing roadwork companies for being late, then maybe, just maye, we may get the traffic flowing again..
10 April 2008, 02:02 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,911
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is always a "way" around a tax. Congestion tax, carbon trading (tax), carbon offsets (tax), will in absolutely no way reduce CO2 emissions (Even in the developed world). It will only make some people, MP's inparticular, richer, the rest (tax payers) poorer (Forget the "third world" they are expendible)!
But watch Inidia outstrip the world in 10 years and become the biggest economy the world has ever seen (China might get there, but I think not. Indians are smarter).
But watch Inidia outstrip the world in 10 years and become the biggest economy the world has ever seen (China might get there, but I think not. Indians are smarter).
Last edited by Klaatu; 10 April 2008 at 02:04 PM.
11 April 2008, 05:00 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lawks - Which poor education did you two have?
Disbenefit is a perfectly proper word.
"no" benefit implies neither an advantage nor disavantage
"Disbenefit" means that something was supposed to have a benefit - infact, has the exact opposite effect - I.e. something that was supposed to reduce emissions, infact, creates more emissions - Hence "Disbenefit"
Bloody illiterates
Disbenefit is a perfectly proper word.
"no" benefit implies neither an advantage nor disavantage
"Disbenefit" means that something was supposed to have a benefit - infact, has the exact opposite effect - I.e. something that was supposed to reduce emissions, infact, creates more emissions - Hence "Disbenefit"
Bloody illiterates
Les
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
28
28 December 2015 11:07 PM