Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Rishi/BoJo U-Turn on a windfall tax – politicalbetting.com

124

Comments

  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    edited May 2022

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    wow...Crazy Horse!
    Shitting Bull

    edit - p.s. apols CHB, just couldn't resist.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,779

    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    I'm not saying that cyclists are brilliant. For sure the type of transport dictates which rule breaking is more common. Just that inconsiderate driving will not be remembered to the extant that cycling will.

    Do you really remember the driver that cut you up on the roundabout? Or was doing 100+ on the motorway? Or ignored the zebra crossing you were waiting at?
    Cyclists going through red lights is like motorists doing 80 on the motorway. It's illegal but whether it is really wrong or not depends on the context. Sometimes it is totally fine, other times it is bloody stupid and dangerous.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,894
    Foxy said:

    We haven’t discussed the very minor brouhaha about M&S pulling out of town centres in favour of out-of-town malls.

    Blame anti-parking local governments.

    Not seen it but am reminded of this:-

    A much bigger blow for the women was the recent closure of Marks & Spencer. ‘There’s nothing nice here any more,’ ‘Nowhere to get something special – nowhere for presents,’ ‘Nowhere with good-quality things – nice knickers.’ I was struck by the powerful impact of the loss of M&S as the pollster Peter Kellner had sent me an interesting article a few months before, pointing out how M&S store closures in small towns could be mapped closely to the Brexit-voting seats that Labour lost. He suggested that we might think of M&S as the canary in the mine, an early prediction of future demise in towns that have lost their sense of purpose.
    Beyond the Red Wall. Deborah Mattinson.
    M&S is one of the best things about the UK, and so I think Kellner’s analysis is very savvy.

    I find the issue interesting as Britain really really should try to avoid the US model of dead town and nearby strip mall.
    Is it though? You sound like some Brexit voters with their nostalgia glasses on all the time. M&S has been troubled for a long time now, failure to modernise and move with the times.

    If you were to pick a store, John Lewis seems much more the "best of British" values. Great service, fair deal for the workers, high quality products while not ripping you off on price.

    But that model is also been stretched now.
    The model of Marks & Spencer closures as a sign of a town's decline can probably be extended to all major shops, including Debenhams, Waitrose and, as you say, John Lewis. It is part of the hollowing out of left-behind towns. As I suggested the other day, this might also be why HMG wants to end WFH in order to reinvigorate the high street as part of "levelling up".
    Shopping in small towns is so poor though. The only decent small towns for this are the posh places with interesting independent stores, other than that it is either online or destination shopping. Even things like clothes have gone online, with lots of returns if you don't like it when tried on.
    Yes but I think that is the point.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,958
    edited May 2022
    ..



    A couple are but this is the real danger for the SNP going forward

    Why are you attaching this oft heard view ( 2007 onwards) on PB to a tweet by a SLab MSP tearing Tories a new one?
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883
    edited May 2022

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    They only got 16.8% in 97, and Davey is no Ashdown.
    True, but I don't remember Paddy having that high a profile, I thought it was wall-to-wall Tony Blair and Major's-foot-in-mouth gaffs. I remember on Election97 results programme on BBC fully expecting the Libdems to barely maintain their 20 achieved in 1992. The avalanche of libdem seats (an extra 26) were a total surprise to me.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    As they should. Its a reduction to the energy cost on each bill. Its not a cash handout.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,996
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    The turn right on red (in the US) if safe always seems like a sensible rule.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836
    edited May 2022

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,779
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    Oh yeah because cars never run red lights.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,647

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    wow...Crazy Horse!
    Or Sitting Bull...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,561

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    wow...Crazy Horse!
    So Sioux him....
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,034

    ..



    A couple are but this is the real danger for the SNP going forward

    Why are you attaching this oft heard view ( 2007 onwards) on PB to a tweet by a SLab MSP tearing Tories a new one?
    You are losing and panicking
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883
    omg, I thought Dr Who had been arrested.....
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    They only got 16.8% in 97, and Davey is no Ashdown.
    True, but I don't remember Paddy having that high a profile, I thought it was wall-to-wall Tony Blair and Major's-foot-in-mouth gaffs.
    He did.

    He was a regular on Spitting Image, for example.

    Hard to even imagine what an Ed Davey puppet would do.

    They are very good at the ground war in by-election campaigns, but very poor at the air war.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,894
    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    Cars jumping red lights might be a regional thing. I've not seen it round here but if you look at Ashley Neal's channel on Youtube, it might as well be part of the Highway Code in Liverpool.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    wow...Crazy Horse!
    So Sioux him....
    There's enough S*itting Bull on here already.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,431
    Nigelb said:

    Russian hackers release Brexiteers' emails

    The website - titled "Very English Coop d'Etat" - says it has published private emails from former British spymaster Richard Dearlove, leading Brexit campaigner Gisela Stuart, pro-Brexit historian Robert Tombs, and other supporters of Britain's divorce from the EU, which was finalized in January 2020.

    The site contends that they are part of a group of hardline pro-Brexit figures secretly calling the shots in the United Kingdom.

    https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-russian-hackers-are-linked-new-brexit-leak-website-google-says-2022-05-25/

    ‘Calling the shots’ is the kind of nonsense the late lamented Gary would have come out with.
    The hack does seem genuine, though… FWIW, which isn’t much.

    It’s not a secret that Dearlove is a hardline Brexiteer, is it ?
    Whatever you think of him (not much in my case), the old git’s entitled to lobby now he’s retired.
    … The "English Coop" site makes a variety of allegations, including one that Dearlove was at the center of a conspiracy by Brexit hardliners to oust former British Prime Minister Theresa May, who had negotiated a withdrawal agreement with the European Union in early 2019, and replace her with Johnson, who took a more uncompromising position.

    Dearlove said that the emails captured a "legitimate lobbying exercise which, seen through this antagonistic optic, is now subject to distortion."

    He declined further comment.…
    Shades of Spycatcher
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    I’ll get a photo of it on Monday, but my local M&S (in Dubai!) has a shop full of Jubilee merchandise and decoration.

    Anecdote from being a uni RAG week collector two decades ago - standing outside M&S was *always* the best place for donations in any given town, and the collectors would (figuratively) fight each other to be there.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,996
    Has Boris lost the support of his own online campaign team?

    The greased piglet won’t stop wriggling…

    https://order-order.com/2022/05/26/labour-to-appoint-fpn-loving-harman-to-lead-investigation-into-boris/
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,716
    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,958

    ..



    A couple are but this is the real danger for the SNP going forward

    Why are you attaching this oft heard view ( 2007 onwards) on PB to a tweet by a SLab MSP tearing Tories a new one?
    You are losing and panicking
    You misunderstood a tweet and are blustering.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    And we'vge had cyclists complaining todfay about people they didn't see appearing suddenly in front of them. Ergo, "nobody visible" doesn't mean it's safe to jump a red.
  • PJHPJH Posts: 645

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    They only got 16.8% in 97, and Davey is no Ashdown.
    True. But Starmer is no Blair either. And the comparison between Johnson and Major is off the scale.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,894

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    The turn right on red (in the US) if safe always seems like a sensible rule.
    We had something similar at a junction close to me for a time but it was ended and the junction reshaped so even cars turning left had to stop for traffic lights. Not sure why — possibly a few near misses with children crossing the road on their way to primary school.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    Oh, quite. Practicalities and all that, and veyr nice for elderly Tory voting pensioners of course. In reality as one of us said today they save on means testing (except in the crude and simple kind that can easilybe applied as done today) and on admin costs especially as you are dealing with many different companies. Imagine the pain of trying to send paper "tokens" or secure digital tokens that you then send to the leccy firms ...
  • PJH said:

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    They only got 16.8% in 97, and Davey is no Ashdown.
    True. But Starmer is no Blair either. And the comparison between Johnson and Major is off the scale.
    Yes Major had some principles.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    The turn right on red (in the US) if safe always seems like a sensible rule.
    We had something similar at a junction close to me for a time but it was ended and the junction reshaped so even cars turning left had to stop for traffic lights. Not sure why — possibly a few near misses with children crossing the road on their way to primary school.
    Yes, I can't imagine turn left on red working here due to pedestrians. Usually they've already been told to cross by the green man.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
     
    Sandpit said:

    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
    … and get his money back …

  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,894

    Nigelb said:

    Russian hackers release Brexiteers' emails

    The website - titled "Very English Coop d'Etat" - says it has published private emails from former British spymaster Richard Dearlove, leading Brexit campaigner Gisela Stuart, pro-Brexit historian Robert Tombs, and other supporters of Britain's divorce from the EU, which was finalized in January 2020.

    The site contends that they are part of a group of hardline pro-Brexit figures secretly calling the shots in the United Kingdom.

    https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-russian-hackers-are-linked-new-brexit-leak-website-google-says-2022-05-25/

    ‘Calling the shots’ is the kind of nonsense the late lamented Gary would have come out with.
    The hack does seem genuine, though… FWIW, which isn’t much.

    It’s not a secret that Dearlove is a hardline Brexiteer, is it ?
    Whatever you think of him (not much in my case), the old git’s entitled to lobby now he’s retired.
    … The "English Coop" site makes a variety of allegations, including one that Dearlove was at the center of a conspiracy by Brexit hardliners to oust former British Prime Minister Theresa May, who had negotiated a withdrawal agreement with the European Union in early 2019, and replace her with Johnson, who took a more uncompromising position.

    Dearlove said that the emails captured a "legitimate lobbying exercise which, seen through this antagonistic optic, is now subject to distortion."

    He declined further comment.…
    Shades of Spycatcher
    Shades of Russian leaks of Hillary Clinton's emails from the Democrats' mail server (or whatever it was).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,647

    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    Cars jumping red lights might be a regional thing. I've not seen it round here but if you look at Ashley Neal's channel on Youtube, it might as well be part of the Highway Code in Liverpool.
    Quite common in Leicester, and bikes running lights too.

    I used to cycle commute, until my job changed to working on several sites so no longer viable. Most of Britain is not set up for safe cycling, compared to countries where it is the norm, like Netherlands or Denmark. The Dutch and Danes have some of the lowest obesity rates in Northern Europe as a result despite diets that aren't much healthier than ours.
  • That is hilarious. 😂
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594
    IF those polls don't improve post this bung....

    then surely....
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    Foxy said:

    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    Cars jumping red lights might be a regional thing. I've not seen it round here but if you look at Ashley Neal's channel on Youtube, it might as well be part of the Highway Code in Liverpool.
    Quite common in Leicester, and bikes running lights too.

    I used to cycle commute, until my job changed to working on several sites so no longer viable. Most of Britain is not set up for safe cycling, compared to countries where it is the norm, like Netherlands or Denmark. The Dutch and Danes have some of the lowest obesity rates in Northern Europe as a result despite diets that aren't much healthier than ours.
    A fine flourishing non-sequitur for a final sentence.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Harvard Psycology Professor Steven Pinker’s book ‘Rationality’, came up with the statistic that more Americans die every year in plane crashes, than in car crashes - if all you do is watch is the national news networks and count the deaths. A significant number surveyed by pollsters agree.

    The reality is a difference of two orders of magnitude, and three orders of magnitude if you ignore recreational aviation. More than 100 people die in car crashes, every day in the US.
    Almost as many Americans died in car crashes in each year during the Vietnam War than died in the entire Vietnam War.
    There are an extraordinary number of road deaths in the US every year - more than 40,000 last year. That's the equivalent of a small parliamentary constituency dying on the roads every year.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836
    https://twitter.com/MartinSLewis/status/1529852240122593281?cxt=HHwWgoC-tbigkLsqAAAA

    This could be interesting - Mr Sunak interviewed by Martin Lewis.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Harvard Psycology Professor Steven Pinker’s book ‘Rationality’, came up with the statistic that more Americans die every year in plane crashes, than in car crashes - if all you do is watch is the national news networks and count the deaths. A significant number surveyed by pollsters agree.

    The reality is a difference of two orders of magnitude, and three orders of magnitude if you ignore recreational aviation. More than 100 people die in car crashes, every day in the US.
    Almost as many Americans died in car crashes in each year during the Vietnam War than died in the entire Vietnam War.
    There are an extraordinary number of road deaths in the US every year - more than 40,000 last year. That's the equivalent of a small parliamentary constituency dying on the roads every year.
    More carnage than from guns?
    Pun intended.

  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,871
    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,647
    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Harvard Psycology Professor Steven Pinker’s book ‘Rationality’, came up with the statistic that more Americans die every year in plane crashes, than in car crashes - if all you do is watch is the national news networks and count the deaths. A significant number surveyed by pollsters agree.

    The reality is a difference of two orders of magnitude, and three orders of magnitude if you ignore recreational aviation. More than 100 people die in car crashes, every day in the US.
    Almost as many Americans died in car crashes in each year during the Vietnam War than died in the entire Vietnam War.
    There are an extraordinary number of road deaths in the US every year - more than 40,000 last year. That's the equivalent of a small parliamentary constituency dying on the roads every year.
    And a similar number of gun deaths. Indeed more people have died of gunshots in the USA in the last 4 decades than in all the US wars since independence.

    I believe drug overdoses, mostly opiates beat road traffic and gun deaths combined.

    America is a very strange society to tolerate this.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    Carnyx said:

    https://twitter.com/MartinSLewis/status/1529852240122593281?cxt=HHwWgoC-tbigkLsqAAAA

    This could be interesting - Mr Sunak interviewed by Martin Lewis.

    Not much fun for you I think. Lewis rather approves of Sunak's magic money tree.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836
    geoffw said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Harvard Psycology Professor Steven Pinker’s book ‘Rationality’, came up with the statistic that more Americans die every year in plane crashes, than in car crashes - if all you do is watch is the national news networks and count the deaths. A significant number surveyed by pollsters agree.

    The reality is a difference of two orders of magnitude, and three orders of magnitude if you ignore recreational aviation. More than 100 people die in car crashes, every day in the US.
    Almost as many Americans died in car crashes in each year during the Vietnam War than died in the entire Vietnam War.
    There are an extraordinary number of road deaths in the US every year - more than 40,000 last year. That's the equivalent of a small parliamentary constituency dying on the roads every year.
    More carnage than from guns?
    Pun intended.

    Road accidents have always been a high risk factor for the US *Army* itself - an appreciable proportion of casualties even in active war.
  • Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    I've made my opinion on second homes etc abundantly clear, but I think in this instance it is perfectly reasonable.

    In order to get this to go through smoothly and easily, and with the minimum of administration, simply applying a £400 discount to everyone makes sense.

    If you try to separate who gets this without getting fraud, and without anyone falling through the cracks, that's going to be a lot of extra admin costs for very minimal gain.

    Far better to handle second home owners via regular taxation routes for them, like a surcharge on Council Tax that is payable every single year, rather than through one of individual items like this.

    Same reason universal benefits make better sense than means tested ones, design your system properly and you should just tax once rather than a million different ways.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836
    geoffw said:

    Carnyx said:

    https://twitter.com/MartinSLewis/status/1529852240122593281?cxt=HHwWgoC-tbigkLsqAAAA

    This could be interesting - Mr Sunak interviewed by Martin Lewis.

    Not much fun for you I think. Lewis rather approves of Sunak's magic money tree.

    He would - he has been very unhappy of late about how the poor are being treated.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402
    Plenty of "why does x get this when hard working I don't" Online.
    And the ubiquitous benefit claimants with BMW's and non-stop foreign holidays seems to be proliferating too.
    Moscow was on high alert for Sunak's speech I reckon.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    .
    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    Surely PAYG is the easiest to deal with, they just put the credit directly on the meter.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    They only got 16.8% in 97, and Davey is no Ashdown.
    True, but I don't remember Paddy having that high a profile, I thought it was wall-to-wall Tony Blair and Major's-foot-in-mouth gaffs.
    He did.

    He was a regular on Spitting Image, for example.

    Hard to even imagine what an Ed Davey puppet would do.

    They are very good at the ground war in by-election campaigns, but very poor at the air war.
    Ah yes, I remember now. I didn't watch much Spitting Image though, I found it very hit and miss, though it certainly got under the skin of David Steel/Owen.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,996
    edited May 2022
    Why is Rishi locked in a the store cupboard?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,647
    geoffw said:

    Foxy said:

    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    Cars jumping red lights might be a regional thing. I've not seen it round here but if you look at Ashley Neal's channel on Youtube, it might as well be part of the Highway Code in Liverpool.
    Quite common in Leicester, and bikes running lights too.

    I used to cycle commute, until my job changed to working on several sites so no longer viable. Most of Britain is not set up for safe cycling, compared to countries where it is the norm, like Netherlands or Denmark. The Dutch and Danes have some of the lowest obesity rates in Northern Europe as a result despite diets that aren't much healthier than ours.
    A fine flourishing non-sequitur for a final sentence.

    A carb and saturated fat diet being burned off by cycling is my point. It isn't just diet making us unhealthy, it is lack of physical activity. Indeed, time I took the pup out.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,360
    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    And we'vge had cyclists complaining todfay about people they didn't see appearing suddenly in front of them. Ergo, "nobody visible" doesn't mean it's safe to jump a red.
    I saw the last pedestrian to nearly kill me by stepping out in front of me from some distance away. I saw them standing on the pavement. And then I saw them step out right in front of me.

    Several hundred people on George IV bridge will have heard me cry out in terror when I narrowly achieved the double of avoiding the pedestrian on one side and the car on the other side of me. For some reason I always reach for religious curses at times like those, despite my lack of belief. Must be the monthly visits to church with the scouts coming out. So if you once heard, "Jesus fucking Christ!" being bellowed in the vicinity - that was me.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,628
    Sandpit said:

    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
    I'm sure he can find a character witness to vouch for him being a pretty straight kind of guy.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    I'm in New York, and the new motorized cyclists are an insane menace - they pay no attention to one way systems or to the lights.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402
    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    Yes. I wondered about that. My gas is on pay as you go. As is my entire block. Though my electricity isn't.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited May 2022
    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    This was addressed in todays statement, no details yet but its on the radar. And the other grants of course are direct
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,561
    "No, no, no senhor - you must carry it like theeeees....."
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    Interesting question, to which I honestly have no idea. Someone should Tweet at Martin Lewis, who’s currently doing an online Q&A with Sunak.
  • Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    While I get your point and agree, if it were up to me it would be legal to turn left at a red light, if there is no-one around. Many nations with RHT allow turn right at a red light in similar circumstances.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    ...
    IshmaelZ said:

    BREAKING Tory MP Stephen Hammond submits letter of no confidence in Boris Johnson. Canaries in the mine are adding up. Problems for the PM.

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1529839505183756294

    The letters is the easy bit.

    Voting the smug b****** out of office is quite another.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    dixiedean said:

    Plenty of "why does x get this when hard working I don't" Online.
    And the ubiquitous benefit claimants with BMW's and non-stop foreign holidays seems to be proliferating too.
    Moscow was on high alert for Sunak's speech I reckon.

    'I work hard for what ive got' wankers are one of my pet hates (especially non bot ones!)
    Like its a unique trait
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,034
    edited May 2022
    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    BBC personal finance correspondent has just said that those on prepayment or pay as you go meters will receive either a credit for £400 or a voucher
  • Sandpit said:

    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
    I'm sure he can find a character witness to vouch for him being a pretty straight kind of guy.
    I'm not sure if that guy is around anymore, if you see him now he seems to have transitioned into Peter Stringfellow.
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,660
    Carnyx said:

    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    I'm not saying that cyclists are brilliant. For sure the type of transport dictates which rule breaking is more common. Just that inconsiderate driving will not be remembered to the extant that cycling will.

    Do you really remember the driver that cut you up on the roundabout? Or was doing 100+ on the motorway? Or ignored the zebra crossing you were waiting at?
    One thing to be in another car, another not to be. And cars don't normally drive on pavements. Unlike cyclists, who are sometimes actually encouraged to do so.
    You're much more likely to be killed by a car on the pavement then a cyclist, pavement or otherwise.

    Of course there is a power dynamic between cyclist and pedestrians. But the dynamic between drivers and everyone else is much greater and far far deadlier.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited May 2022
    Sandpit said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    Interesting question, to which I honestly have no idea. Someone should Tweet at Martin Lewis, who’s currently doing an online Q&A with Sunak.
    It came up in the statement, sunak confirmed moves afoot to ensure pre pay metered customers arent disadvantaged
    No detail though
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    BBC personal finance correspondent has just said that those on prepayment or pay as you go meters will receive either a credit for £400 or a voucher
    Makes sense. A direct credit to the meter for smart PAYG and a voucher to take to the usual top up point for conventional.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836

    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    And we'vge had cyclists complaining todfay about people they didn't see appearing suddenly in front of them. Ergo, "nobody visible" doesn't mean it's safe to jump a red.
    I saw the last pedestrian to nearly kill me by stepping out in front of me from some distance away. I saw them standing on the pavement. And then I saw them step out right in front of me.

    Several hundred people on George IV bridge will have heard me cry out in terror when I narrowly achieved the double of avoiding the pedestrian on one side and the car on the other side of me. For some reason I always reach for religious curses at times like those, despite my lack of belief. Must be the monthly visits to church with the scouts coming out. So if you once heard, "Jesus fucking Christ!" being bellowed in the vicinity - that was me.
    That's a really grim experience. But I was thinking of going through a red light, though, which presuimably this wasn't.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    Have you seen Manhunt: Unabomber? Very interesting psychological element about someone on their own, on a deserted road, in the middle of the night, stopped at a red traffic light. What in the psyche makes someone stay there or ignore it.

    In the show the Unabomber poses just such a question to the FBI guy who we see, stopped at a red light on a deserted road...but he does eye up the light and then the scene finishes.

    Excellent.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,583

    Sandpit said:

    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
    I'm sure he can find a character witness to vouch for him being a pretty straight kind of guy.
    I know two F1 engineers (now ex engineers; they've left the industry). When he finally shuffles off this mortal coil, I expect a few juicy stories about Bernie to come out.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    While I get your point and agree, if it were up to me it would be legal to turn left at a red light, if there is no-one around. Many nations with RHT allow turn right at a red light in similar circumstances.
    Of course. Right-on-red (or left-on-red as it would be in the UK) is an interesting one. My initial guess would be that the junctions are designed around the rules of the road, so there might be unintended consequences. Where I am now, there’s often a filter lane right with a give way rather than a light, which works well most of the time.

    My original point was, that is there a difference between illegally running a red light in a car, and running a red light on a bike - to which the correct answer is no, there isn’t.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Too much hassle to work out how not to pay it, I guess.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,836

    Carnyx said:

    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Yes. IMO most anti cyclist sentiment is derived from selection bias. A cyclist ignore the highway code it is remembered and anecdotes are created as they are the other. A motorist breaks the code its not remarkable just something that happens as they are in group.

    I've always felt that cycling on Britain's roads is the closest to active discrimination I can get in the UK. The power dynamic is huge and you're entirely at the whim of what feels to be a capricious often actively malicious percentage of road users.

    The majority of drivers are lovely and courteous, 5% are ignorant and 1% are bastards.
    I can't remember the last time I saw a car run a red light. Cyclists? All the bloody time.
    I'm not saying that cyclists are brilliant. For sure the type of transport dictates which rule breaking is more common. Just that inconsiderate driving will not be remembered to the extant that cycling will.

    Do you really remember the driver that cut you up on the roundabout? Or was doing 100+ on the motorway? Or ignored the zebra crossing you were waiting at?
    One thing to be in another car, another not to be. And cars don't normally drive on pavements. Unlike cyclists, who are sometimes actually encouraged to do so.
    You're much more likely to be killed by a car on the pavement then a cyclist, pavement or otherwise.

    Of course there is a power dynamic between cyclist and pedestrians. But the dynamic between drivers and everyone else is much greater and far far deadlier.
    I've never had a run in with a car on the pacement in Edinburgh that I can recall. But several very close shaves with cyclists, some at top speed. Precisely the sort of incident which leads to heads impacting the pavement.

    The sooner we see licence plates and licences and cycling tests and compulsory training the happier I will be.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    edited May 2022
    On cyclists' aggression - I have done "everything" in London: driving cars, riding scooters, riding motorbikes, and cycling (and horses but that's a separate issue).

    I now cycle and am frequently the only idiot waiting at the red traffic light as everyone flies through. It irritates me greatly. I don't think that other cyclists are particularly aggressive although they are super vulnerable so perhaps it's a get your retaliation in first. Yesterday on the Embankment opposite the Savoy there was an ambulance with its crew tending a splattered cyclist who was sitting up in a space blanket but his face and legs were pretty messed up, although he was conscious and talking.

    Can happen any time to a cyclist. Slightly less so to a motorcyclist but there are always black cabs to mow you down.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    Who … ?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585

    Sandpit said:

    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
    I'm sure he can find a character witness to vouch for him being a pretty straight kind of guy.
    I know two F1 engineers (now ex engineers; they've left the industry). When he finally shuffles off this mortal coil, I expect a few juicy stories about Bernie to come out.
    There’s a **lot** of stuff to come out once he passes.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,360
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    And we'vge had cyclists complaining todfay about people they didn't see appearing suddenly in front of them. Ergo, "nobody visible" doesn't mean it's safe to jump a red.
    I saw the last pedestrian to nearly kill me by stepping out in front of me from some distance away. I saw them standing on the pavement. And then I saw them step out right in front of me.

    Several hundred people on George IV bridge will have heard me cry out in terror when I narrowly achieved the double of avoiding the pedestrian on one side and the car on the other side of me. For some reason I always reach for religious curses at times like those, despite my lack of belief. Must be the monthly visits to church with the scouts coming out. So if you once heard, "Jesus fucking Christ!" being bellowed in the vicinity - that was me.
    That's a really grim experience. But I was thinking of going through a red light, though, which presuimably this wasn't.
    I guess my point is that most of us will have had more or less traumatic experiences on the road one way or another, where the common factor between the people causing danger is not whether they're a driver or a cyclist, male, female, young or old, but whether they were briefly not paying attention or are simply an entitled arsehole.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,034
    It seems Rishi's proposals are much broader than anything Labour were suggesting and so far they have received a positive reception from the media and others

    I would just say to conservative mps get in your letters and remove Boris and win GE 24
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,785

    ohnotnow said:

    We haven’t discussed the very minor brouhaha about M&S pulling out of town centres in favour of out-of-town malls.

    Blame anti-parking local governments.

    Not seen it but am reminded of this:-

    A much bigger blow for the women was the recent closure of Marks & Spencer. ‘There’s nothing nice here any more,’ ‘Nowhere to get something special – nowhere for presents,’ ‘Nowhere with good-quality things – nice knickers.’ I was struck by the powerful impact of the loss of M&S as the pollster Peter Kellner had sent me an interesting article a few months before, pointing out how M&S store closures in small towns could be mapped closely to the Brexit-voting seats that Labour lost. He suggested that we might think of M&S as the canary in the mine, an early prediction of future demise in towns that have lost their sense of purpose.
    Beyond the Red Wall. Deborah Mattinson.
    M&S is one of the best things about the UK, and so I think Kellner’s analysis is very savvy.

    I find the issue interesting as Britain really really should try to avoid the US model of dead town and nearby strip mall.
    Is it though? You sound like some Brexit voters with their nostalgia glasses on all the time.
    I’m thinking more of the food.

    But I do know people who rely on M&S for clothings basics. They tend to be poorer and maybe older, but M&S delivers quality.
    I'm still wondering why I can't get a food delivery from M&S. It's quite annoying.
    Ocado....
    Ocado don't deliver in Scotland sadly.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083

    ...

    IshmaelZ said:

    BREAKING Tory MP Stephen Hammond submits letter of no confidence in Boris Johnson. Canaries in the mine are adding up. Problems for the PM.

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1529839505183756294

    The letters is the easy bit.

    Voting the smug b****** out of office is quite another.
    Useful nonetheless whatever the outcome. It's already the case that they are all, unless stating otherwise, endorsing him, his behaviour, and his leadership, but a vote, even lost, would force them all to make an active choice. That's useful even if we would not know which way they voted.

    Now, last time the public figure was nowhere near the trigger level when it was announced it was hit, so we cannot really know, but it is a pretty high number to reach, unfortunately.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    Carnyx said:

    geoffw said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    There's some ragin' Nats out there:

    Let’s be clear about what has just happened in Edinburgh:

    Labour has seized control of the council with 13 of 63 councillors.

    Only 11 of their own councillors voted in favour of this + 12 Lib Dems.

    Why could this happen anyway?
    Because Labour chose to give positions to Tories.


    https://twitter.com/TanjaBueltmann/status/1529787678635528195

    Because working with the Toreeees is always evil - except when the SNP do it.....

    I'm not a Green/SNP ultra but this is a complete disaster for those of us who engage in the extreme sport "cycling about in Edinburgh".

    The Tories are rabidly pro-driver here. It's honestly impossible to find a reason to vote for the neanderthals either on a national or local basis - everything is a culture war. I think they associate bikes with wokeists.
    I am no fan of the democratic abomination where a tiny group of 13 Labour councillors can control a council comprised of 63 elected members, but in what respect is the new Labour minority administration “a complete disaster” for cyclists? I got the impression that Scottish Labour is quite pro-cycling? Or are the Edinburgh Labourites uncharacteristically pro-car?

    (Incidentally, the centre-right are very pro-cycling in many European countries, so the hostility of the ones on the big island is a bit of a mystery. Surely we ought to be encouraging healthy and cheap activities? Makes our cities cleaner and more pleasant to live in. Reduces heart-lung and obesity catastrophe. Is fun!! Or ought to be…)
    If they could ban cyclists in Edinburgh it would considerably increase my safety and life expectancy and that of all other pedestrians.
    Seems unlikely.

    'Of around 400 pedestrians killed in collisions in the UK each year, about 2.5 involve a bicycle. Put it another way: more than 99% of pedestrian collision deaths in this country involve a motorised vehicle.'

    As you push them back into their cars you many well be increasing your own risk.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/08/killer-cyclists-roads-bikes-pedestrian-collision-deaths-britain
    Very good point.

    It is astonishing to witness the media prominence given to (relatively rare) rail, maritime and aviation loss of life and life-changing disability injuries whereas the literally daily carnage caused by motor vehicles gets a brief mention on page 32, if you’re lucky.
    Harvard Psycology Professor Steven Pinker’s book ‘Rationality’, came up with the statistic that more Americans die every year in plane crashes, than in car crashes - if all you do is watch is the national news networks and count the deaths. A significant number surveyed by pollsters agree.

    The reality is a difference of two orders of magnitude, and three orders of magnitude if you ignore recreational aviation. More than 100 people die in car crashes, every day in the US.
    Almost as many Americans died in car crashes in each year during the Vietnam War than died in the entire Vietnam War.
    There are an extraordinary number of road deaths in the US every year - more than 40,000 last year. That's the equivalent of a small parliamentary constituency dying on the roads every year.
    More carnage than from guns?
    Pun intended.

    Road accidents have always been a high risk factor for the US *Army* itself - an appreciable proportion of casualties even in active war.
    Same in HMF. It used to be (during Op Banner) that more soldiers died in road accidents than on active service. Including a good friend of mine.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,996
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
    Waiting for the punch line......
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    They only got 16.8% in 97, and Davey is no Ashdown.
    True, but I don't remember Paddy having that high a profile, I thought it was wall-to-wall Tony Blair and Major's-foot-in-mouth gaffs. I remember on Election97 results programme on BBC fully expecting the Libdems to barely maintain their 20 achieved in 1992. The avalanche of libdem seats (an extra 26) were a total surprise to me.
    The most astonishing thing is that the LibDems actually dropped from 6 million to 5.2 million votes - and saw their seat tally more than double.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,996
    ohnotnow said:

    ohnotnow said:

    We haven’t discussed the very minor brouhaha about M&S pulling out of town centres in favour of out-of-town malls.

    Blame anti-parking local governments.

    Not seen it but am reminded of this:-

    A much bigger blow for the women was the recent closure of Marks & Spencer. ‘There’s nothing nice here any more,’ ‘Nowhere to get something special – nowhere for presents,’ ‘Nowhere with good-quality things – nice knickers.’ I was struck by the powerful impact of the loss of M&S as the pollster Peter Kellner had sent me an interesting article a few months before, pointing out how M&S store closures in small towns could be mapped closely to the Brexit-voting seats that Labour lost. He suggested that we might think of M&S as the canary in the mine, an early prediction of future demise in towns that have lost their sense of purpose.
    Beyond the Red Wall. Deborah Mattinson.
    M&S is one of the best things about the UK, and so I think Kellner’s analysis is very savvy.

    I find the issue interesting as Britain really really should try to avoid the US model of dead town and nearby strip mall.
    Is it though? You sound like some Brexit voters with their nostalgia glasses on all the time.
    I’m thinking more of the food.

    But I do know people who rely on M&S for clothings basics. They tend to be poorer and maybe older, but M&S delivers quality.
    I'm still wondering why I can't get a food delivery from M&S. It's quite annoying.
    Ocado....
    Ocado don't deliver in Scotland sadly.
    I wonder what happened to this?

    MARKS & Spencer shoppers can now get groceries delivered to their doors in 30 minutes from 142 of the supermarket's branches - including ones in Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Glasgow. The expanded delivery service with Deliveroo, which launched yesterday, comes ahead of its £750million deal with Ocado set to start in September. - 5 May 2020
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    edited May 2022

    Sandpit said:

    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
    I'm sure he can find a character witness to vouch for him being a pretty straight kind of guy.
    I'm not sure if that guy is around anymore, if you see him now he seems to have transitioned into Peter Stringfellow.
    I sometimes am round the corner from him in London and I can tell you that he receives a string of high profile visitors to whom no doubt he imparts the benefit of his wisdom. And yes there is definitely a Peter Stringfellow vibe going on.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    edited May 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
    The police acting aggressively when they don't receive the response they want? I refuse to believe it...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
    Yes, people dont realise they can have their driving licence endorsed, if they have one, for offences committed on a vehicle for which a licence isn’t required.

    There have been a few “drunk in charge of a horse” or “drunk in charge of an electric scooter” procecutions, where people who had sensibly left their car at the pub ended up banned from driving as a result. I’m not sure that’s particularly a good thing, where maybe a fine should be more appropriate.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    rcs1000 said:

    Lib Dems up to 20% soon IMHO

    ....oh be still my beating heart....

    :smiley:
    They called me crazy when I predicted Labour being very firmly ahead.

    That is my next crazy prediction
    They only got 16.8% in 97, and Davey is no Ashdown.
    True, but I don't remember Paddy having that high a profile, I thought it was wall-to-wall Tony Blair and Major's-foot-in-mouth gaffs. I remember on Election97 results programme on BBC fully expecting the Libdems to barely maintain their 20 achieved in 1992. The avalanche of libdem seats (an extra 26) were a total surprise to me.
    The most astonishing thing is that the LibDems actually dropped from 6 million to 5.2 million votes - and saw their seat tally more than double.
    When you lose 800,000 and the government loses 4 and a half million even retrograde support can win a hatful.
    It handed them a 5000 or more vote swing per seat
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    On topic that's a great LibDem message. Did 300 Cons MPs really vote against a windfall tax last week?!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Bernie Ecclestone. I’m sure he’ll find a way to pay them off.
    I'm sure he can find a character witness to vouch for him being a pretty straight kind of guy.
    I know two F1 engineers (now ex engineers; they've left the industry). When he finally shuffles off this mortal coil, I expect a few juicy stories about Bernie to come out.
    There’s a **lot** of stuff to come out once he passes.
    I’m sure he is as straight as he is tall.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
    Waiting for the punch line......
    There wasn't really a punchline. The police grudgingly accepted that he didn't have a driving license, but only after he'd spent a couple of hours at the station. He was very indignant and wrote letters to the police, his MP, etc., and I don't think anything happened.

    But I kind of get where the police were coming from: a well off 35 year old American bloke in London is 99% likely to have a driving license. And the police didn't want people pulling a Huhne and saying "sorry, I don't have a license". But they massively overreacted to his denials. Taking his name and number and verifying it later would have been much more sensible. (Although, I guess, still vulnerable to people lying to the police.)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,996
    edited May 2022
    TOPPING said:

    On topic that's a great LibDem message. Did 300 Cons MPs really vote against a windfall tax last week?!

    Its not really a particularly interesting point, voting against an opposition proposal. You just say we didn't agree with that plan, ours is better. Happens all the time, even if it is massively disingenuous.

    And in general voters don't care about who came up with what idea, it is if the government do something (however unfair that is) and is it any good.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    edited May 2022
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
    Yes, people dont realise they can have their driving licence endorsed, if they have one, for offences committed on a vehicle for which a licence isn’t required.

    There have been a few “drunk in charge of a horse” or “drunk in charge of an electric scooter” procecutions, where people who had sensibly left their car at the pub ended up banned from driving as a result. I’m not sure that’s particularly a good thing, where maybe a fine should be more appropriate.
    Bloody hell I've been on a (pedal) bike many times having had far too many sherberts. Had no idea there was a crossover with your actual driving licence. While on reflection it's perhaps not the best idea, I thought I was vaguely doing the "right" thing...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    TOPPING said:

    On topic that's a great LibDem message. Did 300 Cons MPs really vote against a windfall tax last week?!

    They voted against a Labour motion, at an Opposition Day debate.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
    Yes, people dont realise they can have their driving licence endorsed, if they have one, for offences committed on a vehicle for which a licence isn’t required.

    There have been a few “drunk in charge of a horse” or “drunk in charge of an electric scooter” procecutions, where people who had sensibly left their car at the pub ended up banned from driving as a result. I’m not sure that’s particularly a good thing, where maybe a fine should be more appropriate.
    I knew a guy who fell off his bike pissed on a roundabout outside a cop shop late one night. The great tool.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Cyclists seem uniquely aggressive in the UK. I suspect it’s because we’re not a very bicycle-friendly nation (as polls show) so cyclists feel they have to fight for the right to be on the road. This creates a vicious, er, cycle - where others perceive them as aggressive so the tension worsens

    I’ve nearly been run over by several in Regent’s Park - whizzing through red lights at speed - not giving a fuck - even though multiple kids cross ti get into the park. Wankers

    Other countries don’t seem to have this pestilence of super-charged twats going as fast as they can within city centres

    As a recent convert to cycle commuting I think that one issue is that it still feels fairly unsafe cycling on the road, and this discourages more risk averse or less confident cyclists from using the roads. This means that a high proportion of cyclists are aggressive risk taking types, and their behaviour then sets the norm. So for instance, generally speaking I don't cycle through red lights, but I do sometimes eg when there are no other road users or pedestrians crossing, especially if it's just a left turn. If everyone else is doing it too you feel a bit stupid waiting there, it is much easier and often safer just to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.
    My general philosophy of road usage as a cyclist and a driver is to pay most attention to those more vulnerable than you. For a cyclist that means pedestrians, and for a motorist that means cyclists.
    Would you go through that red light in your car, if there was no-one around? How’s about if your bike had a number plate?
    About 20 years ago, the City of London police did a crackdown on people jumping red lights. They pulled people over, and then got points put on the cyclists' driving licenses for their transgressions.

    Which, by the way, is a good idea for the most egregious rule breakers.

    However it did cause problems. My then boss was pulled over for running a red light, and they demanded his driving license. "I don't have one", he said. And they refused to believe him. They - stupidly - decided to escalate this, taking him down the station on the assumption that he was lying (he wasn't.)
    Probably made him think twice about jumping the lights, though ?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,215
    Sandpit said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    Interesting question, to which I honestly have no idea. Someone should Tweet at Martin Lewis, who’s currently doing an online Q&A with Sunak.
    I'm watching the live feed. Sunak has an impressive grasp of detail.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    On topic that's a great LibDem message. Did 300 Cons MPs really vote against a windfall tax last week?!

    They voted against a Labour motion, at an Opposition Day debate.
    Ah. Thanks.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,871
    Applicant said:

    .

    Pagan2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Treasury have confirmed that people with second homes will get the £400 energy bill discount for each one

    Fucking hell

    Including rather a lot of MPs, I presume? Though on reflection isn't their leccy bill at one house paid for by the state already? So it shouldn't make any difference?
    Annoying that 2nd home owners get this, but I suspect the cost of trying to NOT send them the money would be too great. I doubt utilities have a record of which home is actually a 2nd one.
    In Wales, second homes are already known about as they pay a Council Tax premium for them.
    But the credit is being dealt with through the energy companies, who work from their own database that doesn’t interface with the local authority.
    So the actual poorest people will miss out then, those on pay as you go meters and who therefore have no relationship with the energy supplier though the landlord will have.
    Surely PAYG is the easiest to deal with, they just put the credit directly on the meter.
    Are payg meters online? What about meters like in my flat that still take coins? Landlord pays the bill when it comes in and collects from the meter.

This discussion has been closed.