Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

IMHAL

Members
  • Posts

    8,003
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by IMHAL

  1. There is whole set of moralistic issues that are being shoved under the rug here because people want to live longer but don't want to pay for it. Sadly, none of these are being addressed because they are not what people want to hear = not popular with voters.
  2. It is a tough issue because that older persons house is also an inheritance to the younger generation. I agree, it should be openly, transparently and properly funded. Probably in a phased fashion, initially with a cap on assets used for SC which is tapered down over time and a phased tapering up of taxes to compensate. It will probably take 10-20 years to sort out.
  3. Ouch and double ouch. Brexit seems to be working.....as foretold by remainers. I'm sure it's just 'a bump in the road' 😄
  4. If the main or only reason to track is so that tarriffs can be dynamically changed to ease congestion, surely your Tom Tom or similar can do the same job, it's the same information/technology so can suggest alternative routes? After all, it's my time that's at stake here.
  5. Yeh, I thought of that too. Theres loads of tarriff possibilities that can be implemented if tracking is adopted (which I don't agree with BTW). They could factor in vehicle type, the type of road being used on a road by road basis, level of congestion on that road etc. As I have said, I don't like the idea of being tracked. I'd rather pay for the electricity consumed by the car, even if it at a different rate to domestic use. RQ's idea of a meter in the car sits more comfortably with me, is simple to understand and would be simpler to implement.
  6. True. I'd rather that as a solution. Can't stand the notion of being monitored by tracking. Tracking would also expensive to implement, especially on small roads.
  7. There is the question of plugging the gap left by fuel excise duty on petrol/deisel which will be considerable..if you think about it, fuel duty is essentially the same thing but packaged in a different way. If they could tax electrons destined to make cars move differently to those that make toast and heat homes then it would not be such a political hot potatoe....
  8. Yes - newsnight did a very good piece on this last night. It sounds to me like they are desperate to introduce road usage pricing but scared that it will be a vote loser. This sort of change is going to be painful for many people and harsh on those in power imposing the change. I can see successive governments approaching this with extreem caution or doing what they are good at....kicking the issue into the long grass..
  9. So there was no need to Brexit to give HGV drivers better pay then!! Great..... another 'benefit' of Brexit debunked.
  10. The comparable efficiency of transport route is all that matters, or a faster route if you will. As RQ has rightly noted, there is always demand for more efficient ways of getting from A to B. I think you are conflating total demand with comparable demand for individual routes in a road network system. If you provide a more efficient route (regardless of the actual number of cars and journeys being made on the whole road network - ie total demand). Then the more efficient route will be used more in preference to he other routes...ie it's comparable demand. So if you provide more lanes on the M25, it will increased the comparable efficiency (capacity) of that route and hence you increase the comparable demand, leading to that route sucking up more from other alternative routes. It will look like increased demand because that is what it is...an increased demand for a more efficient way to get from A to B. It is also extra capacity because it is capable of supplying this demand for a more efficient route. So an increase of capacity on one route naturally leads to an increase of demand for this route in this competing system where the tendency is to get from A to B faster. As a counter and somewhat left field example to this, If people generally valued a more scenic route over a faster A to B route. Then adding more lanes to the M25 would not necessarilly increase demand (compared to the demand for alternatives) because adding more lanes to the M25 would not attract more users compared to other routes that may have more attractive views or may have invested more in making he surrounds more appealing.
  11. That means I'd be able to walk to Calaise and buy cheap booze instead of paying for a ferry. Bring it on. Sorry, what was the question again?
  12. I think I know where you have gone wrong in your thinking...not meant to be patronising. Firstly, when the M25 reaches a natural limit of use, this can be seen as a natural capacity in a system where alternatives routes are also available (ie people get so sick of the delays that they will find alternative routes). That has nothing to do with actual demand for faster transport (as RQ has pointed out.... it's insatiable). By providing a better capacity on the M25, the demand for using that more efficient transportation has increased in comparison to the alternatives. The more you increase the capacity/efficiency of a system that is in competition with other systems, then the more that system will be used in preference to the others it competes with. That does not mean that overall demand for transportation has increased, just that the demand to use the M25 has increased in preference to the alternatives because it is more efficient.
  13. And I have been accused of being a traitor, accused of being a 'furiner', told to leave the country if I don't like it and all sorts. But, I don't like to bring it up or use that as a defence of last resort. I prefer to stick to the matter at hand which is why remainers are having trouble buying into Brexit, both for historical and current reasons and why blaming remainers for our predicament is logically flawed.
  14. You don't need a degree to pick fruit or drive a truck...the North Koreans realised this years ago and look how well they are doing
  15. Well, I think we have reached rock bottom with this discussion. Thanks for your time.
  16. I don't know where you get the idea that most are wedded to thinking we are still an EU member????? It's quite the opposite. We bl00dy well know we have left, as is pointed out by the regular and predominantly negative fall-out. The TCA and how to improve it. Hmmm? Excuse me if I leave that to the architects of our predicament. I dare say that any movement to re-join will depend greatly on the success or failure of Brexit and it's effects on the general population. If there is a real problem, politicians are opportunists and they will move in to fill that space. But, It's early days...there's still much to learn from our experiment into the unknown with no plan to boot.
  17. Personally speaking, I rule no legitimate and future workable option out. I think we will have to see how Brexit turns out. If it is bad enough, then joining with no opt outs and the Euro may not be comparatively as bad. As for 'stuck in EU centric backward thinking'....purleeze don't be patronising....there is no alternative as any forward looking plan/vision is resisted like the plague. Maybe, because it doesn't exist!! Trite.
  18. DB. With all due respect, you are going off at a tangent. I respected your opnion on the 'best Brexit option' which I agreed with to an extent, but I am not enamoured about your response to 'why we are where we are'.... this is were you have been quite vocal of late. It's pretty obvious that you hold some (not so valid points in my opinion) on that, which for whatever reason you are wedded to.... and unwilling to debate. I didn't think that was in your character. Never mind, but noted none the less.
  19. As I said, I don't disagree with that. Yet still I think you have not acknowledged the other point I made. I will set that aside.... for now.
  20. But it does matter DB. It matters a lot because we are not at the end of this spiral of 'the least popular option' yet. We are still sliding down and I dont know where it will end. It's also not helpful to blame remainers for 'being in this situation'...because the fact is that remain is still the most popular end state option compared to any other option. You might as well blame your prefered option ofor opposing TM's option as remain...that is just as valid an observation. If you are going to blame anything, then it is the flawed process.
  21. What are your objective criteria for you thinking 'it's full'? If people are still coming here then obviously the people coming don't think it's full, in fact they think it's more desirable that where ever they have come from. I include people be it from Manchester or Afghanistan (if we are talking about London). They don't think it's full, but Londoners might for various reasons. See comment imbeded. Yes to businesses and no because the M25 is not a business per say. If road capacity increases and it it free at the point of use(ie eat as much as you like for a fixed fee) then it will lead to increased demand. ie it's better than before so more will use it. You need to stop your patronising tone, at least until you have a legitimate reason to do so. Otherwise you look a little silly.
  22. I don't disagree that that is the situation. What I disagree with is that you seem to be blaming predomintly remainers for us being in this situation when the root is that we have been placed, intentionally or unintentionally, in a disgruntled spiral of eradicating all the most popular real options (and I include remain in that). If you are serious about 'working with what we have' and you want remainers to stop pushing back against your position, then you also need to move on fro, 'it's the remainers fault'.
  23. Obviously I have to spell it out for you. What you are saying is we are full. What are your criteria? Is it a subjective feeling or something objective? Maybe you don't understand the difference. See, you are getting abusive again. Lost the argument before you started. You are claiming that they had to increase the capacity from 3 to 4 on the M25 because of demand. Then you say that 'nobody chose to use the M25 because they increased the lanes from 3 to 4'. I am pointing out that increased capacity leads to increased demand. You need to curd your tendencies and debate the facts and your apparent inconsistencies.
  24. Did the average Brexiteers in your view also scupper your vesion of the perfect Brexit? Really DB, the truth is that there was no majority for a perfect or best Brexit. The current Brexit was pushed through as the doors to the less popular options (but not mojority options) where sucessively closed. I include remain as one of those options. The whole debacle looked like this. 48% want to eat at home 52% want to eat out. When asked where we want to eat out, the vote was split. 25% wanted to eat in a home style resaurant, the rest didn't. People got fed up and hungry to boot, at the end someone said 'lets eat' I know a restaurant, let's go'. People said I'm sick and tired of the bickering, so yes, let's do it. That is where we are.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.