Dont panic!

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#1
Article in Mail today.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...tml?in_article_id=560964&in_page_id=1770&ct=5

Basically talking about possible fuel shortages and rising prices. What does worry me is the news that the Government has 'beefed up' emergency contingency plans to deal with it, including plans for police to impund lorries, arrest drivers and strip them of operating licences. Invoke anti-terror laws, ration petrol and mobilise troops. Apart from the fact that troops are in short supply, do they not suppose that troops may have sympathy?
I'm a bit concerned at the fact that police, along with many other agencies are now using anti-terror laws for what are essentially civil protests, or minor problems And no, this is not a 'knock the police' thread.
 

Legs

ADC
Book Reviewer
#2
Anti-Terror laws seem to be the flavour of the month. A bit like HP sauce - it goes with everything....
 
#3
Twisting existing legislation to suit their own ends, doesn't sound like Brron and his shower :roll:

This seems yet another kick in the balls for the driver, what are the alternatives, public transport? Sven may think so but in it's current state not a chance :x
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#5
The emphasis on public transport is always present, and maybe it works well, if you live and work in a large urban area.
My place of work is some 18 miles from my home, takes around 20 mins to drive there. By using public transport, it would take just over 3 hours, always supposing transport ran on time, wasn't cancelled or people on strike/off with bad back. And would cost me around £14 a day.

And more importantly, I would have to travel with ordinary people!
 
#6
old_fat_and_hairy said:
The emphasis on public transport is always present, and maybe it works well, if you live and work in a large urban area.
My place of work is some 18 miles from my home, takes around 20 mins to drive there. By using public transport, it would take just over 3 hours, always supposing transport ran on time, wasn't cancelled or people on strike/off with bad back. And would cost me around £14 a day.

And more importantly, I would have to travel with ordinary people!
Wow! I didn't realise we were neighbours, that's very nearly exactly like my journey.

But I would have to travel with Welsh people............
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#7
Minnesota_Viking said:
old_fat_and_hairy said:
The emphasis on public transport is always present, and maybe it works well, if you live and work in a large urban area.
My place of work is some 18 miles from my home, takes around 20 mins to drive there. By using public transport, it would take just over 3 hours, always supposing transport ran on time, wasn't cancelled or people on strike/off with bad back. And would cost me around £14 a day.

And more importantly, I would have to travel with ordinary people!
Wow! I didn't realise we were neighbours, that's very nearly exactly like my journey.

But I would have to travel with Welsh people............
Oh dear. That's one tragedy I manage to avoid. Still, would be proud to have you as neighbour!.
 
#8
I thought my point was that public transport SHOULD be given a boost, especially in rural areas.

In the West Yorkshire area public transport is quite fast - 40 minutes from Skipton to Leeds or Bradford on the train (which runs every 20 minute or so) it is just so bl00dy expensive for customers.

Buses do have bus lanes as they reach the large conurbations but they are so few and far between.

In my opinion public traansport ought to be subsidised by central government with companies rewarded for carrying greater numbers of seated passengers (seated so that we do not get the debacle I've seen in London where rush hour trains have too few carriages and so customers are treated to an experience they would not dare have visited on cattle - disgraceful)
 
#9
Sven said:
I thought my point was that public transport SHOULD be given a boost, especially in rural areas.

In the West Yorkshire area public transport is quite fast - 40 minutes from Skipton to Leeds or Bradford on the train (which runs every 20 minute or so) it is just so bl00dy expensive for customers.

Buses do have bus lanes as they reach the large conurbations but they are so few and far between.

In my opinion public traansport ought to be subsidised by central government with companies rewarded for carrying greater numbers of seated passengers (seated so that we do not get the debacle I've seen in London where rush hour trains have too few carriages and so customers are treated to an experience they would not dare have visited on cattle - disgraceful)
Agreed. Air travel is subsidised, if that is OK it should be equally applied to all public transport.

Oil is running out, we should start to prepare for the effects.
 
#10
Perturbed said:
Sven said:
I thought my point was that public transport SHOULD be given a boost, especially in rural areas.

In the West Yorkshire area public transport is quite fast - 40 minutes from Skipton to Leeds or Bradford on the train (which runs every 20 minute or so) it is just so bl00dy expensive for customers.

Buses do have bus lanes as they reach the large conurbations but they are so few and far between.

In my opinion public traansport ought to be subsidised by central government with companies rewarded for carrying greater numbers of seated passengers (seated so that we do not get the debacle I've seen in London where rush hour trains have too few carriages and so customers are treated to an experience they would not dare have visited on cattle - disgraceful)
Agreed. Air travel is subsidised, if that is OK it should be equally applied to all public transport.

Oil is running out, we should start to prepare for the effects.
You may like a little laugh over the Government's handling of Public Transport. Private Eye uncovered under their increasingly favourite weapon , the FOI request, that when the Civil Service was asked to draw up a report on Public Transport, and it's many flavours they created a nominal price of Oil per barrel in order to judge the value of public vs private transport. That figure was roughly $50 a barrel. This why, accorrding to Government, Public Transport is supposedly not cost effective. This is also the excuse used to justify NOT converting Trains to Electric.


can any one remember when Oil was $50 a barrel?
 
#11
Sven said:
I thought my point was that public transport SHOULD be given a boost, especially in rural areas.

In the West Yorkshire area public transport is quite fast - 40 minutes from Skipton to Leeds or Bradford on the train (which runs every 20 minute or so) it is just so bl00dy expensive for customers.

Buses do have bus lanes as they reach the large conurbations but they are so few and far between.

In my opinion public traansport ought to be subsidised by central government with companies rewarded for carrying greater numbers of seated passengers (seated so that we do not get the debacle I've seen in London where rush hour trains have too few carriages and so customers are treated to an experience they would not dare have visited on cattle - disgraceful)
Great idea! Why hasn't anybody else been able to come up with that?

I live in a city, ok major city, where the public transport is both comprehensive, frequent and cheap. I rarely use my car when travelling withing the city limits. It is now only partly subsidised by the city authorities (almost entirely subsidised 10 years ago) which has necessitated a rise in ticket price from 3p to 29p a journey in the past 7 years! The network is about 50% public buses/trams and 50% private on contract to the local authority.

How can they do it so cheap? Easy. They pay the staff next to nothing as a salary and offer no pension or sickness benefits. Moreover, there is effectively no health & safety requirements, so there is little need to repair of fix anything if it breaks. You'll probably think most of the vehicles are nothing better than death-traps.

Is that how YOU plan to run YOUR system Sven, or are you assuming that the good working class people of UK are going to be willing to see a massive rise in their taxes to subsidise both the massive investment needed in the infrastructure and the day-to-day running costs? It's cheaper - and far more convenient - for them to run a car.
 
#12
Perturbed said:
Sven said:
I thought my point was that public transport SHOULD be given a boost, especially in rural areas.

In the West Yorkshire area public transport is quite fast - 40 minutes from Skipton to Leeds or Bradford on the train (which runs every 20 minute or so) it is just so bl00dy expensive for customers.

Buses do have bus lanes as they reach the large conurbations but they are so few and far between.

In my opinion public traansport ought to be subsidised by central government with companies rewarded for carrying greater numbers of seated passengers (seated so that we do not get the debacle I've seen in London where rush hour trains have too few carriages and so customers are treated to an experience they would not dare have visited on cattle - disgraceful)
Agreed. Air travel is subsidised, if that is OK it should be equally applied to all public transport.

Oil is running out, we should start to prepare for the effects.
Oh yes, the oil wells are just about dry, just like they were 30 years ago when exactly the same claims were made of imminent exhaustion of supply.
There are new wells being tapped all the time, it will become harder to get eventually but there is no need for this panic and hysteria that we are running out of oil and the world will grind to a halt shortly.
The public transport infrastucture is a joke outside of the cities. In rural areas it cannot be made economical, subsidise it and it still comes out of the publics pocket, just in the form of taxation instead of fare costs to the consumer.
Lets not pretend fuel costs are anything at all to do with the enviroment, its purely about Broon milking the public for every last penny.
How about we bin the idea that private transport is bad and concentrate our efforts on more effective methods of freight transport?
Remember way back when before Beeching we had a rail infrastucture with distribution points from rail yards? The same trains transported small volume freight as well as passengers. Canals and coastal shipping could massively reduce fuel usage and road use.
This philosophy of turning us back to the stoneage is focussed in the wrong direction and thinking small. I think the Victorians could teach us a thing or two about the future.
But then I suppose its easier to blame the individual and tax him to death on the pretext of enviromentalism than it is to actually address the issues in a practical fashion.
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#13
The point I was trying to emphasise, was not the shortcomings or otherwise of public transportation, but rather the draconiam measures thereatened. It appear that protests by working people, ordinary citizens , will attract overwhelming responses, including depriving persons of their jobs, earnings and liberty.
However, the NUT is planning major strike action on Thursday, disrupting schools, depriving the most vulnerable members of our society - children - of education, causing hardship to working parents and costing the country millions in lost productivity , and mostly from what I can read, because teachers feel they are too important to do their own photocopying or filing, ( I have a head teacher and two teacher s in my family, so I am not knocking them), yet there are no plans, threats or mutterings about using anti terror laws against them, nor of deploying troops to stop their protest.
 
#14
Can someone wake Sven up.
For prospective politician, he doesnt seem very knowledgeable.

THEY ARE SUBSIDISED!
 
#15
old_fat_and_hairy said:
The point I was trying to emphasise, was not the shortcomings or otherwise of public transportation, but rather the draconiam measures thereatened. It appear that protests by working people, ordinary citizens , will attract overwhelming responses, including depriving persons of their jobs, earnings and liberty.
However, the NUT is planning major strike action on Thursday, disrupting schools, depriving the most vulnerable members of our society - children - of education, causing hardship to working parents and costing the country millions in lost productivity , and mostly from what I can read, because teachers feel they are too important to do their own photocopying or filing, ( I have a head teacher and two teacher s in my family, so I am not knocking them), yet there are no plans, threats or mutterings about using anti terror laws against them, nor of deploying troops to stop their protest.
Are you in the least bit surprised?
These are the people that slipped in the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act on us without a murmer from anyone. Give the program a few more years and they will ensure that even thinking about dissent is a crime.
 
#16
jagman said:
Oh yes, the oil wells are just about dry, just like they were 30 years ago when exactly the same claims were made of imminent exhaustion of supply.
There are new wells being tapped all the time, it will become harder to get eventually but there is no need for this panic and hysteria that we are running out of oil and the world will grind to a halt shortly.
The public transport infrastucture is a joke outside of the cities. In rural areas it cannot be made economical, subsidise it and it still comes out of the publics pocket, just in the form of taxation instead of fare costs to the consumer.
Lets not pretend fuel costs are anything at all to do with the enviroment, its purely about Broon milking the public for every last penny.
How about we bin the idea that private transport is bad and concentrate our efforts on more effective methods of freight transport?
Remember way back when before Beeching we had a rail infrastucture with distribution points from rail yards? The same trains transported small volume freight as well as passengers. Canals and coastal shipping could massively reduce fuel usage and road use.
This philosophy of turning us back to the stoneage is focussed in the wrong direction and thinking small. I think the Victorians could teach us a thing or two about the future.
But then I suppose its easier to blame the individual and tax him to death on the pretext of enviromentalism than it is to actually address the issues in a practical fashion.
Do you think that oil is infinite then? People said that about the cod banks. Up until now only a fairly small % of the World's human population depended upon oil to go about their daily business (by which I mean the amount consumed/person in the "West"). Once India and China industrialise that % is going to change massively and not only the % but the number the % is based upon.
 
#17
I love the fact that my railway line to london (run by first capital connect) has been allowed to increase prices on the grounds that "it will decrease passenger volume making the journey more comfortable for all." That would be making it so expensive that some people can't afford to travel then. I have no idea how they get away with this when the justification fo sky high fuel duty is that it makes people use public transport.
 
#18
Perturbed said:
Do you think that oil is infinite then? People said that about the cod banks. Up until now only a fairly small % of the World's human population depended upon oil to go about their daily business (by which I mean the amount consumed/person in the "West"). Once India and China industrialise that % is going to change massively and not only the % but the number the % is based upon.
No I don't think we have an infinite supply of oil. I am however certain that it isn't going to run out by 2020 or even 2030.
I know that domestic car usage is one of the smaller users in the grand scheme of things.
The hysteria employed around the world to try and reduce usage is counter productive, far to many people are howling that we need to stop using it and not actually putting realistic effort into replacing it.
We need to put real effort into finding alternatives rather than all these half arsed wind farms etc that don't actually do what is required. All the greenies on the planet saying "stop using cars" isn't actually going to help. Broon taxation the country to death certainly won't.
Instead of saying we will tax you until the point you can't burn fossil fuels how about putting some serious research into alternatives? Instead all we do is rehash ideas that dont actually work.
 
#19
GordonBrown said:
Can someone wake Sven up.
For prospective politician, he doesnt seem very knowledgeable.

THEY ARE SUBSIDISED!
They are indeed, I meant much more substantially and from central and not local government.
 

old_fat_and_hairy

LE
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#20
There are fears for fossil fuels, but as stated by others, taxation does not help. The major cost of fuel for domestic use, is tax heavy, and if that tax was to be withheld, as it has been in U.S.A, it would ease the burden currently placed on the normal household. In Florida, Governor Crist floated the idea of cutting the 14 cent a gallon tax on petrol. John McCain is proposing suspending the 18 cent tax on petrol ( currently at £1.80 a gallon!).
If Broon suggested that I fear another heart attack, but the tax rate on our petrol, around 70% (give or take) of the cost would, if cut or suspended, breathe new life into households and industry. I know that funds have to be found from somewhere to run the country, so perhaps the money made by speed cameras, -sorry, sfatey-partnership accident prevention devices - could replace the fuel tax. Or maybe a cut in MPs salaries.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top