Road pricing bill before Commons

[Vito]

I'm now struggling with this whole arguement...

Point 1: A car is a luxury that helps improve the quality of your life...it is not an essential item (it may be essential to maintaining our current standard of life, but it is not essential for existence).

So, question one...does anyone disagree with the above?


Point 2: Public transport is sometimes good and sometimes poor, it is also sometimes cheaper than a car, and also sometimes more expensive?

So, question two...does anyone disagree with point two?


Point 3: The more wealthy people will continue to drive no matter what the cost (and probably not really suffer elsewhere in their life either) and the less wealthy people will have to cut down on driving if costs increase (or they will have to cut down on something else)...thus, wealthier people will experience no drop in quality of life, whereas less wealthy people will have to reduce the quality of their life.

Does anyone disagree with point three?


Point 4: The wealthier people will continue to be able to afford to travel long distances to work whereas less wealthy people won't (assuming public transport is either too expensive or not good enough in some areas)...thus this will mean wealthy people have more career opportunities and less wealthy people have less career opportunities...therefore the wealth gap will just get bigger and bigger.

Does anyone disagree with Point 4?


Point 5: Most of us could and probably should drive cars that are better for the environment that the ones we currently drive...and we should accept criticism coming our way for this...providing of course that the criticism is coming from people that do nothing non-essential that causes any environmental harm.

Does anyone disagree with point 5?


Basically, the rich will get a bit poorer (by paying road tolls) and the less rich will get much poorer (won't have the same career opportunities)...so, not really sure how anyone can defend the proposal...unless of course, all the money made from the scheme (and I mean ALL) goes towards either improving public transport or making it cheaper.

[BoredBloke]

I'd like to know how many people use the toll road near Birmingham on a daily basis. It's £4 a go, so that's £8 a day or £40 per week (£2k per year) That is a lot to find out of your already taxed income, on top of all the other motoring taxes.

I suspect most locals stick to the old M6 while commuters and sales reps/people who drive for a living and rich people would use it daily.

[wendigo100]

I suspect most locals stick to the old M6 while commuters and sales reps/people who drive for a living and rich people would use it daily.

It's like those lanes they reserve for government officials in Moscow. Prescott tried to implement them here.

Road charging hits the poor.

[wendigo100]

You made the statement that "cars do vast amounts of damage". To me this is a meaningless cliche ....

Dodgy, you do realise that is a troll you are talking to. By now, anyone else with a baseless argument like them would have realised what an idiot they've been.

[dang65]

You made the statement that "cars do vast amounts of damage". To me this is a meaningless cliche (not put into any context) that you are using to lend weight to your arguments. Unfortunately I do not buy your basic assumption so I am asking you to explain what you mean by it.

Cars block up the road, they make noise, they make potholes, they make accidents, they make pollution.

Lorries, vans and buses also contribute to the above, but a car almost invariably carries just one person, whilst lorries, vans and buses carry large volumes of freight or passengers.

This is all basic general knowledge.

I mean, even if you aren't particularly bothered about the environment then you must have some sense of smell, hearing and sight which allows you to observe traffic jams, the endless hum and swish of cars going past, the road surface torn up at pretty much every junction by accelerating wheels, the casualty statistics and the stink of fumes.

Maybe you just don't notice all those things when you're inside your car with the windows up, air conditioning on and music blasting. I suppose everything seems fine in there. But try getting outside into the actual world where normal people live and then tell me that cars don't do vast amounts of damage.

[Ardesco]

Cars block up the road, they make noise, they make potholes, they make accidents, they make pollution.

Lorries, vans and buses also contribute to the above, but a car almost invariably carries just one person, whilst lorries, vans and buses carry large volumes of freight or passengers.

What a load of tosh.

Cars don't make accidents, accidents happen due to people not paying attention, bad driving, or unavoidable bad luck. As for cars making all the potholes, I think not. What is more likely to make a pothole a car wieghing half a ton or a lorry weighing 30? the driving force behind potholes is bad road construction and erosion (both of which do not require cars)

Lots of things make pollution, I would love to see you live your day to day life without creating any pollution at all.

Really all your arguments are personal points of opinion that you are trying to make fact and as a result are poorly thought out and wrong more often than not.

[dang65]

What a load of tosh.

Cars don't make accidents, accidents happen due to people not paying attention, bad driving, or unavoidable bad luck. As for cars making all the potholes, I think not. What is more likely to make a pothole a car wieghing half a ton or a lorry weighing 30? the driving force behind potholes is bad road construction and erosion (both of which do not require cars)

Lots of things make pollution, I would love to see you live your day to day life without creating any pollution at all.

Really all your arguments are personal points of opinion that you are trying to make fact and as a result are poorly thought out and wrong more often than not.

How can I argue against such incredible ignorance? In fact, I'm going to have to assume this is a wind up and ignore it.

[Vito]

How can I argue against such incredible ignorance? In fact, I'm going to have to assume this is a wind up and ignore it.

As always Dang...you've stated ignorance but not actually been able to point to exactly what was not factual about the statements made by Ardesco...

[DodgyAgent]

Cars block up the road, they make noise, they make potholes, they make accidents, they make pollution.

Lorries, vans and buses also contribute to the above, but a car almost invariably carries just one person, whilst lorries, vans and buses carry large volumes of freight or passengers.

This is all basic general knowledge.

I mean, even if you aren't particularly bothered about the environment then you must have some sense of smell, hearing and sight which allows you to observe traffic jams, the endless hum and swish of cars going past, the road surface torn up at pretty much every junction by accelerating wheels, the casualty statistics and the stink of fumes.

Maybe you just don't notice all those things when you're inside your car with the windows up, air conditioning on and music blasting. I suppose everything seems fine in there. But try getting outside into the actual world where normal people live and then tell me that cars don't do vast amounts of damage.

That is a bit like saying that feet are destructive. They wear out shoes, they occupy space, they trample grass. It is just like saying washing machines are destructive; they use up electricity, they waste water, they vibrate and shake foundations of buildings and they have to be delivered in huge Gas guzzling "destructive" lorries. You idiot, do you understand what "context" means?. Roads were built and are maintained and modernised for the use of cars which funnily enough are used by "normal" people, so what if they are congested.

vans are often used to carry one person, and lorries are used to carry what can be argued are "unnecessary" consumer goods. You clearly have a thing about cars which you cannot put into any sort of context of an argument, which can only mean that you have an insecurity problem

[dang65]

As always Dang...you've stated ignorance but not actually been able to point to exactly what was not factual about the statements made by Ardesco...

B-but... why do we ban firearms and knives in this country? I mean, duh, "guns don't kill people, people kill people". And knives don't do anything.

What else does this guy say? "Cars don't make potholes, lorries do." Yes, I'm sure lorries contribute greatly to the general mayhem. However, find a road junction at one of those side turnings where there's always a steady stream of traffic on the main road. At those places (and there are a lot of them) cars accelerate into gaps in the traffic. You can hear the crunch of ripped up tarmac and the wheel spin as they do it. Trucks cause plenty of damage to little bridges and villages as they thunder through, but they don't accelerate like that at junctions. They physically can't (and I've driven trucks, so I know). And there are far more cars than lorries, vans and buses combined.

What else? (I can't believe I'm spending time on this. It's basic common sense.) "Lots of things make polution." That's not even in the debate. Of course lots of things make pollution. Most of them don't cause hundreds of thousands of casualties every year, block up the roads and stink out the road you're walking down or make it so you can't talk to someone in the street without shouting.

"Arguments... personal opinion... poorly thought out... blah blah." No. Don't think so.