LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksAway with it... I say
Away with it... I say
Years and yeeears ago, when the Metrolink was originally planned, there were promises of lines going all over the Greater manchester area. Now, unless you want travel to/from Bury, Altrincham or Eccles, you're screwed. Plans for expansions have been announced several times since the Metrolink was announced, for all of them to be thrown out again.
I don't believe for one solitary moment that all these shiny promises are going to bring easy, safe, regular, reliable, comfortable and cheap public transport to all the people in the Greater Manchester area that need it.
Agree 100%, the metro line has had funding removed left right and centre it was supposed to be up and running by now wasn't it? I really cant see it happening any time soon work would need to start sooner rather than later to make the metro link a via able service into Manchester and even then the metro link isnt cheap contary to what the MPs etc keep telling us.Originally Posted by Mike Fishcake
Permanently confused
Anyway, I'm back to my preferred option - increase fuel duty and use the money to further improve public transportIt's not stealthy, it's a transparent, easy to understand tax whereby you only pay for what you use
Transparent.. as in showing you the tax you're paying at the pump? The yanks do. Us?
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
First off, how much does the road use have to be reduced by? 30%?
Then look at wealth distribution in the UK (which is very skewed). This is how your able to see who would have what impact by a fee.
Now it doesn't hit hardest on those least able to pay, as they are simply not able to drive on the road, because the effect it has on them is less than the cost of the charge.
The problem comes if they have no alternative, in london its fair to say where the C-Charge spans there are a veritable mirriad of alternatives. As such its not the "poorest" who get hit, but the lowest ground of those wealthy enough to take the fine.
This is the point your saying that n% HAVE to stop driving. Those who can't afford the fee as such aren't the hardest hit (because they'd of HAD to of stopped driving before) its actually those who can afford it who are going to be stung.
This is why i don't think it would work in mancy land. They have no alternatives. A bit more carrot and a bit less stick.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
The difference between Manchester's proposal and London's charge is that London is an all day tax, while manchester is only operational at peak times, so if you travel into Manchester outside the peak hours, and out, avoiding peak hours, you avoid the charge - and in thory spread the congestion more thginly - peak times get less congested, times either side get more. How that works in practice reemains to be seen.
However, the other issue is that of public transport, and London based MPs seem to think that the abundant public transport facilities London enjoys is replicated across the country - which it certainly isn't! (I can't get a bus to my local railway station - 4 miles away - for example)
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
Everyone is Stung as you say whether you can or can not afford it.. I think you fail to see the point.
If you can afford it then the sting is easier to pallet, put it this way its like the poor get stung by a Bee (stung once and it leaves it with you) the rich are fools and like getting stung over and over again like a wasp it really doenst matter to them and half of the rich will stick it on company expences anyway. were as the worker bee's have to pay thier own expences so to say it effects the rich more is frankly ilogical
__________________
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
Error exists between Keyboard & Chair replace User and press Any Key!
.... Where's the Any Key???
Charging Zone | Transport for London
only pay it during peek hours in london. I Know a couple of people who avoid paying it because they travel off peak (in work by 6:30, gym for an hour then in the office for 7:30.... freaks).
Your not understanding what i mean.
Some people have to stop driving, thats the idea.
Its those that don't pay the charge (because they stop driving in, perhaps because their poor, or because they have easy alternatives) they don't get stung.
its those that can only just afford to pay it who get stung most.
Those who are immensily weathly will of course be effected the least.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
So am I safe to assume this system as most Government systems target the poor and my statement of steal from the poor to give to the rich is correct?
__________________
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
Error exists between Keyboard & Chair replace User and press Any Key!
.... Where's the Any Key???
How are they stealing from poor people?
Poor people can't afford it, so will have the same amount of dosh. The only thing they've lost is the ability to drive in a certain area. No one is then 'giving' to the rich, as they are having to pay. Those who are worse off are those who HAVE to pay the charge and can't avoid it.
Try something like the undercover economist, someone much more elegent with words will explain the principles.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
That's a confusing statement. The poor recieve more from the government than they give, the rich give more than they recieve. How is that targeting the poor?
All that will happen is that people that can afford it will bend over for their daily shafting and the council will get more dosh to fritter away. As it becomes more expensive to run a business in Manchester due to reduced footfall and a charge on commercial vehicles that have no choice then people will do business in other cities. It will be the same in Nottingham when they introduce the £350 per year per parking space at any place of employment that has more than 10 spaces. Businesses will go elsewhere.
People are now starting to realise that they are getting screwed and have to do one of three things. Stand as a candidate for local council on a policy of removing said scheme, move to another part of the country, emigrate.
And when these charges cover the entire road network where will these people drive? That's right they won't. You see it's the old cucumber method of doing something, slice a little here, a little there, slowly, slowly, catchy naive public, and BAM!!! The cucumber has disappeared and everyone is scratching their heads wondering how they lost their <insert whatever here>. The London measure was the first slice of the cucumber and because el Gordo is a sneaky **** and councils now need more money than ever because they are not funded properly from central taxation and have the secondary burden of having to meet unfunded central government targets all the while laws have been changed/introduced to allow councils to increase their revenue.
Who is the easiest target? Yep, Mr and Mrs motorist. Chuck in stuff like pollution, global warming, congestion, more roads = more cars, speed kills and other nonsense and you brainwash the very motorists who you are rogering at the same time. Brilliant! 1.8 million people signed against pay as you go motoring. The idea wasn't dropped and schemes like London and Manchester are the very start of introducing it country wide by the back door.
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
I think there's a bit of confusion here - possibly a little pedantry in certain areas, but it seems that there are a few people that agree with each other that are arguing over niggly little points.
If I understand TheAnimus correctly, he's saying (and this is a massive generalisation just to explain)
Before the Congestion Charge:
Poor people: Can't afford to drive anyway
People in the middle: Can only just afford to drive
Rich people: Can afford to drive.
After the Congestion Charge:
Poor people: Can't afford to drive anyway, so no change in circumstances
People in the middle: Can't afford to drive any more
Rich People: Can still afford to drive.
This is probably correct in theory, but I think we're deviating a bit.
Last edited by Mike Fishcake; 12-06-2008 at 09:31 AM.
Seems about right - would the increase in public transport funding also help the poor people out more?
when I say poor I don't mean people who live on the streets.
Sorry poor is probably the wrong word, what will happen the in regards the way they will be shaping manchester is
Most Manchester workers will still drive as most will be able to afford it so people from out of town who work here will still come. The real people at loss will be the retail businesses who will loose trade from people who drive there to shop becuase who wants to pay £10 + to park and drive there?
__________________
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
Error exists between Keyboard & Chair replace User and press Any Key!
.... Where's the Any Key???
Not to mention couriers who have to travel into such places, then they put their prices up to compensate and it gets more expensive.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
