Howdy, Stranger!

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

The betting continues on the by-election that might not happen – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,216
edited August 2023 in General
imageThe betting continues on the by-election that might not happen – politicalbetting.com

On June 9th the novelist, TV presenter, and occasional MP Nadine Dorries, announced that she was resigning as an MP “with immediate effect”. This prompted the bookies and betting exchanges to set up markets on a by-elecion in Mid Bedfordshire..

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,135
    This reminds me a bit of Blair's will-he-won't-he resignation dance in 2007. A strange business.

    But if her resignation hasn't happened by now, I'm not sure it will unless something else happens to force the issue.
  • Looks to me like the betting is not continuing on this market. £14k traded in total, which considering from memory Smarkets counts both sides so each £1 matched = £2 so really £7k matched. And that's not even including the fact Smarkets will itself be a party to much of that.

    Of which looking at the chart on the bottom, the last big stake matching was on Labour at about 11 July so nearly three weeks ago now.

    No real trading seems to have happened then. Tiny dots at the bottom of the chart representing a few quid a day at best.

    Punters seem to be alert to the fact this is a void market and if you bet on it you're just giving Smarkets your stake interest-free for five months until it gets voided.

    Considerably higher stakes have been matched in recent days on other Smarkets political betting markets, such as the Year of Next General Election (where for some bizarre reason people are betting on 2023 - weirdos!), Overall Majority (where thousands have been staked on Labour in recent days).

    Not to forget US Presidential Markets. Versus the about £5 a day getting matched on this market, close to £5k a day is being matched on the Democratic Nominee as well as more on the Republican Nominee and Overall winner markets.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    edited July 2023
    That's quite notable.

    How decisions by physicians are affected by left-digit bias (like retail pricing of $7.99 instead of $8.00)
    —ED diagnosis of heart attacks age < 40
    —Decision to do heart surgery age > 80
    —Opioid prescription for age < 18

    From Random Acts of Medicine
    https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1685665928233795584
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,156
    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    edited July 2023

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    edited July 2023
    HS2 is officially ‘unachievable’ after being given red rating
    Problems with first two phases, from London to Birmingham and then to Crewe, ‘do not appear to be resolvable’
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/30/hs2-officially-unachievable-red-rating-problems-london-birmingham
    The HS2 rail project, which has been beset by severe delays and soaring costs, has been branded as “unachievable” by the government’s infrastructure watchdog.

    Having analysed plans for the construction of the first two phases of the high-speed line, from London to Birmingham and then on to Crewe, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority said the project was not, in its view, deliverable in its current form.

    The IPA sits at the heart of government, reporting to the Cabinet Office and the Treasury, and its finding will be seized on by campaigners...

    .. A “red” rating was assigned to the plans for the construction of the first two phases. This means that “successful delivery of the project appears to be unachievable”, the IPA said in its annual report on big projects.

    It added: “There are major issues with project definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable. The project may need rescoping and/or its overall viability reassessed….


    No plans to address any of this, but the sunk cost fallacy means we plough on.

    … A DfT spokesperson said: “Spades are already in the ground on HS2, with 350 construction sites, over £20bn invested to date and supporting over 28,500 jobs. We remain committed to delivering HS2 in the most cost-effective way for taxpayers.

    “HS2 will bring transformational benefits for generations to come, improving connections and helping grow the economy.”


    That last assertion looks increasingly dubious.
    There will be zero benefits for at least a decade, as we carry on spending.
  • sbjme19sbjme19 Posts: 194
    It's bad that the people of Mid-Beds aren't represented but in a way she's an asset to Labour as a constant reminder of the sort of people that incredibly rose to Cabinet rank under the Tories.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Nigelb said:

    That's quite notable.

    How decisions by physicians are affected by left-digit bias (like retail pricing of $7.99 instead of $8.00)
    —ED diagnosis of heart attacks age < 40
    —Decision to do heart surgery age > 80
    —Opioid prescription for age < 18

    From Random Acts of Medicine
    https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1685665928233795584

    Is it really left digit bias by physicians or actual guidelines, processes and practices?
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    Good morning.

    A satisfying day of betting yesterday.

    When the England men decided to carry on batting, and having studied the rainfall radar, I bet on a draw at 11/1. By 5 pm the odds had tightened to 3/1 and I cashed out having more than doubled my money. Not too shabby for 6 hours.
    The Aussie batters are still top drawer and the England bowlers look knackered.*

    I could have stayed in the market but today might go any of four ways and I decided to cut and run.


    * The ECB have been remiss in jamming 5 test matches into a month all so that they can prioritise their Hundred franchise. The latter is good for women's cricket but doing this to the Ashes test series is all wrong.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,156
    edited July 2023
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
    Obviously it is good to know the scale of the problem and how it is changing but to me, even if 1 person is left fully unbanked (as opposed to having one account closed but others open, or ability to open elsewhere) that is unnacceptable. It is a worse punishment than probation, community service or most fines, and even potentially worse than prison. It is imposed by arbitrary and kafkaesque procedures run for banks risk mitigation rather than individual case accuracy. So the 2016-7 situation was already in need of change back then.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
    I wonder if the figure is inflated a little by Brexit. A number of banks, not mine, closed UK accounts of people living in the EU as a result of new post Brexit rules which made them too expensive? awkward? to continue operating.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    edited July 2023
    sbjme19 said:

    It's bad that the people of Mid-Beds aren't represented but in a way she's an asset to Labour as a constant reminder of the sort of people that incredibly rose to Cabinet rank under the Tories.

    Indeed.

    Someone yesterday dared to post that the sleaze of this regime is nothing compared to 1992-7. I didn't respond at the time, but it is I am afraid nonsense.

    1992-7 was bemusingly bad. 2019-2024 has rubbed people's noses into the stench of corruption and, worse than that, has been associated with the death of loved ones. The fact that Johnson, Sunak, and their buddies partied away whilst people were deprived of the most basic freedoms, and in some cases even visiting dying relatives, will not be forgotten in a long, long, time.

    Okay, so she was on a different level than ordinary people but this haunting image of The Queen, mourning her beloved husband, alone ... whilst those f*ckers partied the night away is one example. Do people really think all this won't be brought back at the General Election? There will be a reckoning at the ballot box and the full fury of the people will be voiced.


  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,027
    The banking problem is yet another result of unintended consequences. As banking regulation increased after the GFC the cost to the bank of monitoring and servicing accounts increased making them look more closely at which accounts were worth having (from their perspective). Farage and Coutts may have highlighted this story but, as usual, it is the poor that tend to suffer most.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,708
    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,969
    Heathener said:

    sbjme19 said:

    It's bad that the people of Mid-Beds aren't represented but in a way she's an asset to Labour as a constant reminder of the sort of people that incredibly rose to Cabinet rank under the Tories.

    Indeed.

    Someone yesterday dared to post that the sleaze of this regime is nothing compared to 1992-7. I didn't respond at the time, but it is I am afraid nonsense.

    1992-7 was bemusingly bad. 2019-2024 has rubbed people's noses into the stench of corruption and, worse than that, has been associated with the death of loved ones. The fact that Johnson, Sunak, and their buddies partied away whilst people were deprived of the most basic freedoms, and in some cases even visiting dying relatives, will not be forgotten in a long, long, time.

    Okay, so she was on a different level than ordinary people but this haunting image of The Queen, mourning her beloved husband, alone ... whilst those f*ckers partied the night away is one example. Do people really think all this won't be remembered at the General Election? There will be a reckoning at the ballot box.


    Yet the Tories won Uxbridge, prior to the 1997 general election the last Tory by election hold was 1989.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779
    "The incumbent, Nadine Dorries, has a book about Johnson coming out in conference season ..."

    Soon to be a major situation comedy.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,969
    edited July 2023

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,969
    DavidL said:

    The banking problem is yet another result of unintended consequences. As banking regulation increased after the GFC the cost to the bank of monitoring and servicing accounts increased making them look more closely at which accounts were worth having (from their perspective). Farage and Coutts may have highlighted this story but, as usual, it is the poor that tend to suffer most.

    It's also a result of technology.

    In the good old days you wanted to do a bank transfer or international payment you had to go to the bank, now you perform those actions from your smartphone.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    edited July 2023

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,966
    Nigelb said:

    HS2 is officially ‘unachievable’ after being given red rating
    Problems with first two phases, from London to Birmingham and then to Crewe, ‘do not appear to be resolvable’
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/30/hs2-officially-unachievable-red-rating-problems-london-birmingham
    The HS2 rail project, which has been beset by severe delays and soaring costs, has been branded as “unachievable” by the government’s infrastructure watchdog.

    Having analysed plans for the construction of the first two phases of the high-speed line, from London to Birmingham and then on to Crewe, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority said the project was not, in its view, deliverable in its current form.

    The IPA sits at the heart of government, reporting to the Cabinet Office and the Treasury, and its finding will be seized on by campaigners...

    .. A “red” rating was assigned to the plans for the construction of the first two phases. This means that “successful delivery of the project appears to be unachievable”, the IPA said in its annual report on big projects.

    It added: “There are major issues with project definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable. The project may need rescoping and/or its overall viability reassessed….


    No plans to address any of this, but the sunk cost fallacy means we plough on.

    … A DfT spokesperson said: “Spades are already in the ground on HS2, with 350 construction sites, over £20bn invested to date and supporting over 28,500 jobs. We remain committed to delivering HS2 in the most cost-effective way for taxpayers.

    “HS2 will bring transformational benefits for generations to come, improving connections and helping grow the economy.”


    That last assertion looks increasingly dubious.
    There will be zero benefits for at least a decade, as we carry on spending.

    There are major issues:
    1. Infrastructure has been mandated to be resistant to plagues of locusts and other calamities for an extended period at the contractor's expense. Remove such bullshit and the construction cost falls rather significantly
    2. The cost- benefit analysis of the section being built will be awful because only building this section is lunacy. Commit to further stages now and suddenly the CBA is favourable again
    3. It is not zero cost scrapping the thing now - many many billions would be needed to remove / mothball the works

    That we have (a) both allowed HS2 to be a ludicrously expensive political football and (b) are seriously talking about scrapping it is very British. We're shit at major infrastructure projects when it comes to planning and concept. Very few get built compared to comparable countries. And at vastly greater cost
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,027

    DavidL said:

    The banking problem is yet another result of unintended consequences. As banking regulation increased after the GFC the cost to the bank of monitoring and servicing accounts increased making them look more closely at which accounts were worth having (from their perspective). Farage and Coutts may have highlighted this story but, as usual, it is the poor that tend to suffer most.

    It's also a result of technology.

    In the good old days you wanted to do a bank transfer or international payment you had to go to the bank, now you perform those actions from your smartphone.
    Yes, and that has aggravated source of funds issues. My daughter is having terrible trouble getting a bank for a private company set up by doctors to fund research and training at her hospital. They run courses and trials through it which often involves a lot of international transfers of relatively small sums of money with the odd larger lump sum. Not a huge turnover, lots of complications, the banks don't really want to know.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,969
    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
    I wonder if the figure is inflated a little by Brexit. A number of banks, not mine, closed UK accounts of people living in the EU as a result of new post Brexit rules which made them too expensive? awkward? to continue operating.
    I wonder if that stat also contains dormant account closures?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,921
    edited July 2023
    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,969
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The banking problem is yet another result of unintended consequences. As banking regulation increased after the GFC the cost to the bank of monitoring and servicing accounts increased making them look more closely at which accounts were worth having (from their perspective). Farage and Coutts may have highlighted this story but, as usual, it is the poor that tend to suffer most.

    It's also a result of technology.

    In the good old days you wanted to do a bank transfer or international payment you had to go to the bank, now you perform those actions from your smartphone.
    Yes, and that has aggravated source of funds issues. My daughter is having terrible trouble getting a bank for a private company set up by doctors to fund research and training at her hospital. They run courses and trials through it which often involves a lot of international transfers of relatively small sums of money with the odd larger lump sum. Not a huge turnover, lots of complications, the banks don't really want to know.
    American Express are pissing me off.

    They seem incredulous that somebody owns one property and lives at another.

    If I want to keep my AMEX cards I will need to have my payslips changed to my regular residential address rather than the address I spend 1/2 nights a week in.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516

    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
    I wonder if the figure is inflated a little by Brexit. A number of banks, not mine, closed UK accounts of people living in the EU as a result of new post Brexit rules which made them too expensive? awkward? to continue operating.
    I wonder if that stat also contains dormant account closures?
    Wait until they start closing lawyers escrow accounts because they dont like some of your clients .
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,969

    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
    I wonder if the figure is inflated a little by Brexit. A number of banks, not mine, closed UK accounts of people living in the EU as a result of new post Brexit rules which made them too expensive? awkward? to continue operating.
    I wonder if that stat also contains dormant account closures?
    Wait until they start closing lawyers escrow accounts because they dont like some of your clients .
    Been there done that.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,140
    Surely the issue is over regulation. AML and similar makes opening any account, or even simply changing signatories a drawn out pain in the arse, as I am finding out as Trustee of my church.

    Like so much of our regulation, I remain unconvinced that the benefit outweighs the harm.

    It used to be so much easier. A friend of mine in the Eighties opened an account with a high St bank in the name of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov just for a laugh with the chequebook.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,649
    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    kamski said:

    Nigelb said:

    That's quite notable.

    How decisions by physicians are affected by left-digit bias (like retail pricing of $7.99 instead of $8.00)
    —ED diagnosis of heart attacks age < 40
    —Decision to do heart surgery age > 80
    —Opioid prescription for age < 18

    From Random Acts of Medicine
    https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1685665928233795584

    Is it really left digit bias by physicians or actual guidelines, processes and practices?
    In effect, yes.
    There's no good clinical reason for the cliff edges in those graphs.

    Though whether it's practical to do anything about them is an interesting question.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,927

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    He will reverse on this IMHO because it’s an easy campaign issue to hit him with. And he is demonstrating by his actions in recent weeks that he is shutting down anything that gives the hint of a possible attack line.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,101
    @KevinASchofield
    Amazing clash on Radio Scotland between presenter Martin Geissler and Rishi Sunak, who confirmed he is taking a private jet to Scotland to make his, er, green energy announcement today.

    The PM bizarrely accused him of wanting to ban people going on holiday. Extraordinary stuff.

    @peterwalker99
    Rishi Sunak can sometimes be surprisingly peevish, even charmless, and that was very much on show with his Good Morning Scotland interview just now. Began with a whinge, complained about questions, talked over others, and ended after five mins by more or less hanging up.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
    Obviously it is good to know the scale of the problem and how it is changing but to me, even if 1 person is left fully unbanked (as opposed to having one account closed but others open, or ability to open elsewhere) that is unnacceptable. It is a worse punishment than probation, community service or most fines, and even potentially worse than prison. It is imposed by arbitrary and kafkaesque procedures run for banks risk mitigation rather than individual case accuracy. So the 2016-7 situation was already in need of change back then.
    It's not just the scale if the problem - it's the rate at which it's getting worse.
    Otherwise banks would just say 'we're working to address it', or some such pablum.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    Good morning @Big_G_NorthWales and that's a great post.

    I know this is controversial but I'm a believer in nuclear power. It's the greenest and most naturally occurring form of energy in the universe, particularly so when we succeed in harnessing fusion.

    You just have to try and ensure that the things don't blow up but that's a secondary point and not, in my opinion, a reason for preventing their expansion.

    I'd much rather we push nuclear power than further drilling for finite fossil fuels.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,778



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230

    Nigelb said:

    HS2 is officially ‘unachievable’ after being given red rating
    Problems with first two phases, from London to Birmingham and then to Crewe, ‘do not appear to be resolvable’
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/30/hs2-officially-unachievable-red-rating-problems-london-birmingham
    The HS2 rail project, which has been beset by severe delays and soaring costs, has been branded as “unachievable” by the government’s infrastructure watchdog.

    Having analysed plans for the construction of the first two phases of the high-speed line, from London to Birmingham and then on to Crewe, the Infrastructure and Projects Authority said the project was not, in its view, deliverable in its current form.

    The IPA sits at the heart of government, reporting to the Cabinet Office and the Treasury, and its finding will be seized on by campaigners...

    .. A “red” rating was assigned to the plans for the construction of the first two phases. This means that “successful delivery of the project appears to be unachievable”, the IPA said in its annual report on big projects.

    It added: “There are major issues with project definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable. The project may need rescoping and/or its overall viability reassessed….


    No plans to address any of this, but the sunk cost fallacy means we plough on.

    … A DfT spokesperson said: “Spades are already in the ground on HS2, with 350 construction sites, over £20bn invested to date and supporting over 28,500 jobs. We remain committed to delivering HS2 in the most cost-effective way for taxpayers.

    “HS2 will bring transformational benefits for generations to come, improving connections and helping grow the economy.”


    That last assertion looks increasingly dubious.
    There will be zero benefits for at least a decade, as we carry on spending.

    There are major issues:
    1. Infrastructure has been mandated to be resistant to plagues of locusts and other calamities for an extended period at the contractor's expense. Remove such bullshit and the construction cost falls rather significantly
    2. The cost- benefit analysis of the section being built will be awful because only building this section is lunacy. Commit to further stages now and suddenly the CBA is favourable again
    3. It is not zero cost scrapping the thing now - many many billions would be needed to remove / mothball the works

    That we have (a) both allowed HS2 to be a ludicrously expensive political football and (b) are seriously talking about scrapping it is very British. We're shit at major infrastructure projects when it comes to planning and concept. Very few get built compared to comparable countries. And at vastly greater cost
    At this point, even 2) is questionable.

    Otherwise I agree. But none of what you suggest will happen.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    But anyway.

    What. A. Fight.

    Hope everyone has seen it. Worth getting up at 3am to watch.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited July 2023
    Foxy said:

    Surely the issue is over regulation. AML and similar makes opening any account, or even simply changing signatories a drawn out pain in the arse, as I am finding out as Trustee of my church.

    Like so much of our regulation, I remain unconvinced that the benefit outweighs the harm.

    It used to be so much easier. A friend of mine in the Eighties opened an account with a high St bank in the name of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov just for a laugh with the chequebook.

    Yes this was mentioned on some radio programme the other day. A woman thought, as a rite of passage, she would take her son to open a bank account in the high street on his 18th birthday. In her day you went in and opened a bank account.

    She said it was nigh on impossible. This form and that AML declaration and all the rest.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Nigelb said:

    kamski said:

    Nigelb said:

    That's quite notable.

    How decisions by physicians are affected by left-digit bias (like retail pricing of $7.99 instead of $8.00)
    —ED diagnosis of heart attacks age < 40
    —Decision to do heart surgery age > 80
    —Opioid prescription for age < 18

    From Random Acts of Medicine
    https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1685665928233795584

    Is it really left digit bias by physicians or actual guidelines, processes and practices?
    In effect, yes.
    There's no good clinical reason for the cliff edges in those graphs.

    Though whether it's practical to do anything about them is an interesting question.
    Is it though? If there are guidelines or decision trees or points systems or timings of checkups or whatever that say "do something at 40 that you didn't do at 39" you could just change the guideline/whatever to say do something different at 39 or 42. If there was then a jump at 39 or 42 would you still call it left digit bias? If the jump stayed at 40 then yes it's caused by left digit bias.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Dura_Ace said:



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
    By when do you think it might be problematic to go and fill up a car with petrol/diesel?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,921
    edited July 2023

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,769
    Foxy said:

    Surely the issue is over regulation. AML and similar makes opening any account, or even simply changing signatories a drawn out pain in the arse, as I am finding out as Trustee of my church.

    Like so much of our regulation, I remain unconvinced that the benefit outweighs the harm.

    It used to be so much easier. A friend of mine in the Eighties opened an account with a high St bank in the name of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov just for a laugh with the chequebook.

    When I opened an account for my business, it proved literally impossible to do so at one bank. Because one of the agencies I work with is owned by a Chinese national, even though it's based in the UK and pays taxes here, they said they needed more information.

    The only snag was, they couldn't tell me what information they needed.

    Which made the entire process truly Kafkaesque.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited July 2023
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    Yep. Plus camber gets a fair few.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,769
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    I take it it's any one of those, not a requirement somebody be doing all of them at the same time?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,649
    edited July 2023
    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,649

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    He will reverse on this IMHO because it’s an easy campaign issue to hit him with. And he is demonstrating by his actions in recent weeks that he is shutting down anything that gives the hint of a possible attack line.
    It would be true to form
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    TOPPING said:

    But anyway.

    What. A. Fight.

    Hope everyone has seen it. Worth getting up at 3am to watch.

    No idea what specific event you are talking about but assuming it's some variation of two blokes getting paid to kick the shit out of each other, nothing would possess me to watch that.

    I cannot understand why some people are turned on by violence.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,921
    edited July 2023
    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
    By when do you think it might be problematic to go and fill up a car with petrol/diesel?
    I think I would see an analogy with the runout of leaded petrol or ***** petrol - a gradually greater distance to travel as the demand reduces, and development of a new / overlapping network of charging stations, which will be partly built around eg drive in snack places / places (eg Costa, McDonalds, Greggs) where 30 minutes can be spent doing something else, and local availability of high current electricity infra.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
    Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.

    If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited July 2023

    TOPPING said:

    But anyway.

    What. A. Fight.

    Hope everyone has seen it. Worth getting up at 3am to watch.

    No idea what specific event you are talking about but assuming it's some variation of two blokes getting paid to kick the shit out of each other, nothing would possess me to watch that.

    I cannot understand why some people are turned on by violence.
    Turned on is a strange description. Sounds a bit projection-y. But you do you.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,769

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Shame they were going for milking, or he could have demonstrated it was a load of bull...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,230
    This ought to get some converts to the idea of 'decolonising' the curriculum.

    How Russian colonialism took the Western anti-imperialist Left for a ride

    https://www.salon.com/2023/07/29/how-russian-colonialism-took-the-western-anti-imperialist-left-for-a-ride/
    ..."People, I think, just get so wedded to their vision of themselves as fighting 'The Man,' fighting the power that they are blinded and taken for a ride by Russia, in this case serving as useful idiots," Junisbai said.

    Both Yuliia and Artem Shaipov pointed the finger at academic studies of Russia in the West that view it through Moscow's imperial lens. The two have published articles advocating for a "decolonization" of Russia studies and greater attention to how veneration of the "great Russian culture" – such as the genocide- and conquest-glorifying literature of Mikhail Lermontov and Alexander Pushkin – has provided a conduit for Russian imperialist ideology to sneak into the Western mind...
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,778
    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
    By when do you think it might be problematic to go and fill up a car with petrol/diesel?
    It depends what you mean by problematic - it will definitely get expensive in the 2030s as service stations and associated efficiences of scale disappear. ICE cars will become an enthusiast pastime like owning a horse is now. You can still buy hay, I assume.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,879

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The thought required is pretty basic. If person X has a right to financial services of some sort, then definable Y must have a duty to provide it.

    It is unlikely this can occur without a statutory basis unless there were a 'state' bank of last resort.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Dura_Ace said:

    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
    By when do you think it might be problematic to go and fill up a car with petrol/diesel?
    It depends what you mean by problematic - it will definitely get expensive in the 2030s as service stations and associated efficiences of scale disappear. ICE cars will become an enthusiast pastime like owning a horse is now. You can still buy hay, I assume.
    At a price.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138
    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    Surely the issue is over regulation. AML and similar makes opening any account, or even simply changing signatories a drawn out pain in the arse, as I am finding out as Trustee of my church.

    Like so much of our regulation, I remain unconvinced that the benefit outweighs the harm.

    It used to be so much easier. A friend of mine in the Eighties opened an account with a high St bank in the name of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov just for a laugh with the chequebook.

    Yes this was mentioned on some radio programme the other day. A woman thought, as a rite of passage, she would take her son to open a bank account in the high street on his 18th birthday. In her day you went in and opened a bank account.

    She said it was nigh on impossible. This form and that AML declaration and all the rest.
    And people wonder why the alt banks are soaring.

    They often start with a soft opening - your account is just a user name, email address, password. You can receive money up to a certain amount.

    To send money, BACS, etc you need to do some KYC checks - scan a passport or driving license via a phone. Up and running in an hour. Often less.

    The offer you virtual as well as physical cards. So from the moment the account is verified you can add the virtual card to Apple Pay or the Google equivalent.

    The next banking crisis will be the alt-banks of course. Chase is kind of interesting, because it is actually an old bank, operating in the alt-bank space in the U.K.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
    If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.

    16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    edited July 2023

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
    Spreading out increases overtaking distance and is more dangerous.

    The speed limit does not apply to cyclists.

    Cycling has fallen by 8x since the 1950s.

    The vast majority of cyclists hold driving licences and have insurance (usually through their home insurance).

    100% of your post was nonsense.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138
    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    Yep. Plus camber gets a fair few.
    The mad design of road humps is an issue.

    Often they are those “mound” ones - which are always place to encourage drivers to swerve out of their lane.

    Many humps are so sharp that they penalise small cars, mopeds and bikes severely. Way back, when I was living in Hampstead, a nasty outbreak of such bumps led all the rich people to start buy giant American cars. That lasted about a year, until they realised the downsides of owning Der P1000 Ratte.

    Apparently, competitors to the companies making the current speed cameras have come out with miniaturised, higher performance, cheaper cameras. Which the existing vendors are trying hard to prevent being certified. These could be cheaper, apparently, than creating and maintaining a road full of humps.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    edited July 2023

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The banking problem is yet another result of unintended consequences. As banking regulation increased after the GFC the cost to the bank of monitoring and servicing accounts increased making them look more closely at which accounts were worth having (from their perspective). Farage and Coutts may have highlighted this story but, as usual, it is the poor that tend to suffer most.

    It's also a result of technology.

    In the good old days you wanted to do a bank transfer or international payment you had to go to the bank, now you perform those actions from your smartphone.
    Yes, and that has aggravated source of funds issues. My daughter is having terrible trouble getting a bank for a private company set up by doctors to fund research and training at her hospital. They run courses and trials through it which often involves a lot of international transfers of relatively small sums of money with the odd larger lump sum. Not a huge turnover, lots of complications, the banks don't really want to know.
    American Express are pissing me off.

    They seem incredulous that somebody owns one property and lives at another.

    If I want to keep my AMEX cards I will need to have my payslips changed to my regular residential address rather than the address I spend 1/2 nights a week in.
    Good to see Amex doing their bit to reduce the housing crisis. ;-)
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,708

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
    A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    edited July 2023
    (trying to reset vanilla)
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Yet 9 years ago they told us the oil and gas had run out and suddenly it has been found again, typical Tories lying through their teeth.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
    They do. Highway Code.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364

    TOPPING said:

    Foxy said:

    Surely the issue is over regulation. AML and similar makes opening any account, or even simply changing signatories a drawn out pain in the arse, as I am finding out as Trustee of my church.

    Like so much of our regulation, I remain unconvinced that the benefit outweighs the harm.

    It used to be so much easier. A friend of mine in the Eighties opened an account with a high St bank in the name of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov just for a laugh with the chequebook.

    Yes this was mentioned on some radio programme the other day. A woman thought, as a rite of passage, she would take her son to open a bank account in the high street on his 18th birthday. In her day you went in and opened a bank account.

    She said it was nigh on impossible. This form and that AML declaration and all the rest.
    And people wonder why the alt banks are soaring.

    They often start with a soft opening - your account is just a user name, email address, password. You can receive money up to a certain amount.

    To send money, BACS, etc you need to do some KYC checks - scan a passport or driving license via a phone. Up and running in an hour. Often less.

    The offer you virtual as well as physical cards. So from the moment the account is verified you can add the virtual card to Apple Pay or the Google equivalent.

    The next banking crisis will be the alt-banks of course. Chase is kind of interesting, because it is actually an old bank, operating in the alt-bank space in the U.K.
    What *is* an alt bank, please? I can't find a clear definition.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
    If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.

    16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
    The number killed was 99 dont try bigging the stats up. the 16k is injusred and that comapres with 17k motor cyclists, 75k car occupants and 19k pedestrians.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-provisional-estimates-year-ending-june-2022/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-provisional-estimates-year-ending-june-2022
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,649
    malcolmg said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Yet 9 years ago they told us the oil and gas had run out and suddenly it has been found again, typical Tories lying through their teeth.
    Good morning Malc

    Hope you and your family are well

    As a matter of interest do you support the granting of the new licences
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364
    Dura_Ace said:

    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
    By when do you think it might be problematic to go and fill up a car with petrol/diesel?
    It depends what you mean by problematic - it will definitely get expensive in the 2030s as service stations and associated efficiences of scale disappear. ICE cars will become an enthusiast pastime like owning a horse is now. You can still buy hay, I assume.
    Horses are also expensive to maintain. But one can still get vets. Garages for IC, I'm not so sure. Especially when the electronics chips wear out. (So a 2CV might be OK.)
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
    Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.

    If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
    I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    edited July 2023

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
    Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.

    They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,138
    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    Yep. Plus camber gets a fair few.
    The mad design of road humps is an issue.

    Often they are those “mound” ones - which are always place to encourage drivers to swerve out of their lane.

    Many humps are so sharp that they penalise small cars, mopeds and bikes severely. Way back, when I was living in Hampstead, a nasty outbreak of such bumps led all the rich people to start buy giant American c
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
    Spreading out increases overtaking distance and is more dangerous.

    The speed limit does not apply to cyclists.

    Cycling has fallen by 8x since the 1950s.

    The vast majority of cyclists hold driving licences and have insurance (usually through their home insurance).

    100% of your post was nonsense.
    Cycling registration will happen, but not for these reasons.

    While I was away, there was a collision between a rider of a souped up electric bike and a child on a bike, locally. Head on in a segregated bike lane. Child is ok. Electric bike rider left the scene. According to eye witnesses, he was exceeding 20mph, and had been pulling wheelies.

    Since there will be all kinds of games played registering everything on 2 wheels will be the simple answer.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    edited July 2023

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
    A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
    Pedestrians hate bells, in my experience. "Excuse me" is far more effective, and better manners.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500
    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    Yes . we can all start walking 4 miles along the grass verge or side of the road and get ourselves splattered. Hard not to enjoy yourself carrying a week's shopping 4 miles along a busy road.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516
    edited July 2023
    Eabhal said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
    They do. Highway Code.
    Thats only accelerating the matter.

    And they dont predestrians do.

    Also which ever civil servant drew up the rules has never seen a peloton heading straight for horse riders.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,879
    The banks problem is a nice example of what happens when government (and legislative) policy involves compelling something (banking for all) and forbidding it (no banking for groups X and Y) at the same time.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    edited July 2023

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
    If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.

    16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
    The number killed was 99 dont try bigging the stats up. the 16k is injusred and that comapres with 17k motor cyclists, 75k car occupants and 19k pedestrians.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-provisional-estimates-year-ending-june-2022/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-provisional-estimates-year-ending-june-2022
    How many drivers were killed by cyclists?

    How many drivers were killed by pedestrians?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,649
    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
    If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.

    16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
    I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
  • SandraMcSandraMc Posts: 703
    Please do not describe Nadine Dorries as a novelist. It is like describing a child who brings home painted daubs from primary school as an artist.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
    A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
    Pedestrians hate bells, in my experience. "Excuse me" is far more effective, and better manners.
    I tried to have a reasonable conversation with someone who complained bitterly that I hadn't used a bell when approaching him (quite slowly) from behind on my handcycle.

    Bizarre conversation as he was extremely deaf and I had to repeat everything 2 or 3 times.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    edited July 2023
    .

    Eabhal said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
    If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.

    16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
    I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
    That is a disgraceful comment.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,415
    edited July 2023
    Eabhal said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
    They do. Highway Code.
    Not to pedestrians
    Equal to other cyclists & people using horses 'regard to their own safety and others' (In the specific case of horse riders that'll generally mean cyclists passing safely as horses tend to walk or trot on the road which is between 3 and 8 mph generally)
    Priority to anything with a motor.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,516

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
    Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.

    They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
    I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.

    The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,483
    malcolmg said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.

    Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
    Yes . we can all start walking 4 miles along the grass verge or side of the road and get ourselves splattered. Hard not to enjoy yourself carrying a week's shopping 4 miles along a busy road.
    Closure of local village shops in the last forty or fifty years also needs taking into account. Back in the 1980s, one village I lived in had two shops and a butchers. Now it has one shop with limited time. The village my parents now live in used to have a village shop; it now does not. The bus service has been cut to one or two a day from hourly, and the nearest supermarket is three miles away, with a nasty road walk to get there.

    I *wish* it was easier for pubs to become local hubs and sell other stuff and services, e.g. post.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,049

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
    A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
    Ha ha, what melts. I use a bell. Usually to warn bloody dog walkers and their little pooch.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,778
    Carnyx said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
    By when do you think it might be problematic to go and fill up a car with petrol/diesel?
    It depends what you mean by problematic - it will definitely get expensive in the 2030s as service stations and associated efficiences of scale disappear. ICE cars will become an enthusiast pastime like owning a horse is now. You can still buy hay, I assume.
    Horses are also expensive to maintain. But one can still get vets. Garages for IC, I'm not so sure. Especially when the electronics chips wear out. (So a 2CV might be OK.)
    There's nothing that can't be replaced. I lost the speedo drive when I put a T56 6 speed manual in my Firebird. I retained the original speedo in the dash and drove it using a gps receiver, arduino and servo from an RC car all held together with 3d printed bits. Not strictly legal but it got through its MoT. 💵➡️🫲
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
    Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.

    They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
    I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.

    The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
    To be fair I was exaggerating a bit. Many horse riders are polite but as with most things the obnoxious ignorant ones stick in the mind.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    To what road safety benefit on rural roads?

    The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.

    The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
    The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.

    Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.

    Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
    Spreading out increases overtaking distance and is more dangerous.

    The speed limit does not apply to cyclists.

    Cycling has fallen by 8x since the 1950s.

    The vast majority of cyclists hold driving licences and have insurance (usually through their home insurance).

    100% of your post was nonsense.
    Cyclists regularly mowing down pedestrians does sound bad though.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,649
    Eabhal said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
    Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.

    If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
    I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
    We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus

    Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,364

    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    (FPT)
    The Farage affair is highlighting some quite interesting stats.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/30/uk-banks-closing-more-than-1000-accounts-every-day
    ...The figures, obtained through a freedom of information (FoI) request made to City watchdog the Financial Conduct Authority and first reported in the Mail on Sunday, revealed that in 2016-17, just over 45,000 accounts were shut by banks.

    The total has increased every year since, climbing to just over 343,000 accounts in 2021-22 –
    representing well over 1,000 for every business day of the week....

    ...A few weeks before the Farage story broke, the Guardian revealed how a retired social worker who had spent the past year doing humanitarian work across Ukraine had her account suddenly shut by Lloyds...


    Journalists should be FOI-ing more regularly to check the effects of changes in legislation on its unintended victims.

    This government is, of course, hostile to the idea of FOI rights.

    Start from the observations that literally everyone needs a bank account or we drive them to homelessness and further criminality, and that it is the banks financial interest to close the most costly to monitor accounts.

    It quickly becomes clear that the direction of travel will accelerate further against the customer, and society, until the laws are changed.

    We don't need a royal commission but a couple of hours clear thought to establish this.
    The increase since 2017 is damning.
    Anecdotes are interesting; statistics definitive.
    I wonder if the figure is inflated a little by Brexit. A number of banks, not mine, closed UK accounts of people living in the EU as a result of new post Brexit rules which made them too expensive? awkward? to continue operating.
    I wonder if that stat also contains dormant account closures?
    Are those figures for all closed accounts - including some closed voluntarily, e.g. deceased persons' accounts and executry accounts no longer required? Or ones closed involuntarily only? I'm not clear from the news report.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,483

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.

    Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.

    As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.

    Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.

    As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
    My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.

    Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.

    Err no

    They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?

    Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.

    Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
    I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
    Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.

    They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
    I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.

    The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
    I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,805
    Dura_Ace said:

    Carnyx said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    TOPPING said:

    Dura_Ace said:



    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    The two proposals are different.

    UK: 2030 ban on 100% ICE cars. Hybrids can still be sold. There won't be any 100% ICE cars available from volume manufacturers in 2030 so there really isn't any point to this lofty goal. It's just the reality.

    EU: 2035 ban on new vehicles that don't have zero CO2 emissions (exemption for small volume manufacturers). A more stringent and worthy goal that can only be met by BEV or e-fuel vehicles.
    By when do you think it might be problematic to go and fill up a car with petrol/diesel?
    It depends what you mean by problematic - it will definitely get expensive in the 2030s as service stations and associated efficiences of scale disappear. ICE cars will become an enthusiast pastime like owning a horse is now. You can still buy hay, I assume.
    Horses are also expensive to maintain. But one can still get vets. Garages for IC, I'm not so sure. Especially when the electronics chips wear out. (So a 2CV might be OK.)
    There's nothing that can't be replaced. I lost the speedo drive when I put a T56 6 speed manual in my Firebird. I retained the original speedo in the dash and drove it using a gps receiver, arduino and servo from an RC car all held together with 3d printed bits. Not strictly legal but it got through its MoT. 💵➡️🫲
    More accurate than the original speedo I bet.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,955
    edited July 2023

    Eabhal said:

    TOPPING said:

    kamski said:

    Heathener said:

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.

    Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
    Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.

    Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
    Good morning

    I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London

    However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads

    The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain

    I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
    Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
    Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.

    If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
    I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
    We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus

    Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
    Google maps right now: Car 32 mins. Bike 26 mins. Bus 41 mins.

    Only a fool wouldn't cycle that.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,945

    FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.

    People will always have cars.

    I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
This discussion has been closed.