Do you seriously think the money would have been spent improving public transport?
The problem with public transport is that the public use it.
The problem with public transport is that the public use it.
-
-
in this case yes i do as the plans are in place and the books balancedOriginally posted by DimPrawn View PostDo you seriously think the money would have been spent improving public transport?
The problem with public transport is that the public use it.
agreed the public use the transport, but, as the majority of my transport requirements are a taxi out of the city to the airport or into the city at weekends the charge wouldnt affect me but the benefits (even if only a vague possibility in your view) would benefit me and so in my personal case a yes seemed the obvious voteThe proud owner of 125 Xeno Geek PointsComment
-
Next you'll be saying direct income tax should be 90% as we'd all benefit with world class educationa and health care.
It's like no one has learned **** all here over the last 10+ yrs.
Oh Dear ™. CUK land of the stupid and gullible.Comment
-
I'm in favour of a congestion charge. Though an increase in petrol, road tax and reducing speed limits around town to 20mph would be additional options. Plus fines for car users at regular intervals. I would also close one road lane (slightly widening the other, making a one-way system) and set the other aside for use by bicycles and livestock.Comment
-
Did the 'cock-a-knees' get a vote when London introduced tolls?Science isn't about why, it's about why not. You ask: why is so much of our science dangerous? I say: why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out, because you are fired. - Cave JohnsonComment
-
These sort of decisions should never go to public vote. It's like offering people the chance to decide if they pay tax or not.
Missed opportunity to join up the gaps and make a very good transport system. Sad day.
I didn't get to vote myself because I live too far out from the centre, though close enough that it takes me less than an hour to cycle in to town when I do go up there. Or about twenty minutes on the train. It makes me wonder who the hell did vote against it. If you were elligible to vote then you were close enough to walk in to town, near enough.Comment
-
-
Thank god common sense prevailed and its been voted down. Why pay twice for improvements when over £4billion is already taken from motorists with only a fraction used for travel infrastructure?
Would it have eased congestion? Very much doubt it. Would it have led to improved public transport? Very much doubt it.
It would have opened the floodgates to every city and town introducing charging if the 'Yes' vote had won.
I dont often congratulate any manc but this time I'll make an exception. Well done on the 'No!' vote!I couldn't give two fornicators! Yes, really!
Comment
-
Originally posted by BolshieBastard View Post
WHS.
A yes would have meant another £20 for every journey in every town on top of rising fuel duty and massively increasing road taxes.
If you feel so strongly suggest you give all your money away. It will make the world a better place.Comment
-
Apart from the 20mph thing I'm pretty sure you've got all of these already, one way or another...Originally posted by TimberWolf View Post"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. "
Thomas JeffersonComment
Comment