Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

[beesonthewhatnow]

This is an interesting article. It's a little out of date, so the figures will likely be much worse, but it clearly shows that rather than fewer cars, more motorways is the answer.

https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/roads%20and%20reality%20-%20bayliss%20-%20what%20pattern%20of%20motorway%20network%20is%20needed%20-%20051208%20-%20background%20paper%206.pdf

There might be a tiny problem with the impartiality of the organisation behind that you know.

More roads equal more traffic, not less congestion. We’ve known this since the 60’s.

What's Up With That: Building Bigger Roads Actually Makes Traffic Worse

The concept is called induced demand, which is economist-speak for when increasing the supply of something (like roads) makes people want that thing even more. Though some traffic engineers made note of this phenomenon at least as early as the 1960s, it is only in recent years that social...

www.wired.com

 

[Clair De Lune]

Has anybody noticed how it's the oldies, close to or past retiring age, who are so keen on preventing others from travelling? It's like an episode of One foot in the grave

Listen Jeremy, some might fall for your poorly disguised edgy trolling but not all. Get a fucking horse then cowboy.

 

[JimW]

Few interesting factors here include the ubiquity of online shopping which has outpaced car ownership so maybe the out of town hypermarket might not prevail.
Carrefour and a few others did arrive earlier but not sure they ever became the almost one stop weekly shop like at home.

 

[Saul Goodman]

There might be a tiny problem with the impartiality of the organisation behind that you know.

More roads equal more traffic, not less congestion. We’ve known this since the 60’s.

What's Up With That: Building Bigger Roads Actually Makes Traffic Worse

The concept is called induced demand, which is economist-speak for when increasing the supply of something (like roads) makes people want that thing even more. Though some traffic engineers made note of this phenomenon at least as early as the 1960s, it is only in recent years that social...

www.wired.com

All that proves is they weren't building roads fast enough to keep up with the demand for them.

 

[mhendo]

All that proves is they weren't building roads fast enough to keep up with the demand for them.

You're one of those guys who believes that a company that is losing money on every unit it sells should simply produce more so they can make it up in volume, aren't you?

 

[platinumsage]

Surely new roads are built so as to carry more traffic. If they led to less traffic and were largely empty, they’d be a failure.

 

[Saul Goodman]

There might be a tiny problem with the impartiality of the organisation behind that you know.

From a different source.

This is all consistent with generally inferior transport infrastructure provision in comparison with our European peers. Our principal airports are in much the same position as our main roads, with the runways at Heathrow and Gatwick having twice the passenger throughput of any of those in Europe’s busiest 11 airports (Figure 22). Moreover, this phenomenon is not confined to transport. If we look at power generation and flood and coastal defences, similar messages are to be heard.

https://trl.co.uk/sites/default/files/Fifty%20years%20of%20motorways%20-%20how%20did%20we%20get%20there%20and%20where%20to%20we%20go%20next.pdf

Basically, the UK needs to spend a lot more money on its infrastructure, not least on its motorways.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Surely new roads are built so as to carry more traffic. If they led to less traffic and were largely empty, they’d be a failure.

Or carry the same traffic with less congestion?

 

[deeyo]

Few interesting factors here include the ubiquity of online shopping which has outpaced car ownership so maybe the out of town hypermarket might not prevail.
Carrefour and a few others did arrive earlier but not sure they ever became the almost one stop weekly shop like at home.

That is interesting. Suppose it will be the same in india and africa, internet quicker than cars. How does online shopping work in china? What do you buy, where is it from, where do you pick it up?

Saul Goodman when we all get our helicopters, existing motorways will be sufficient.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Cars are freedom for the individual and the family ..
Cars permit you to take jobs that otherwise wouldn't be possibly to take.
Cars save you loads of money compared to public transport if it even is available.
Cars permit you to live where you would like rather than being restricted to city centres.
Cars allow you to visit friends and family at a time of your choosing.
Cars let you go on holiday at home and abroad in the most flexible way possible.
Passing a driving test and getting a full driving licence is a rite of passage to adult life!

I chose not to choose cars.
I chose something else.

 

[Athos]

I chose not to choose cars.
I chose something else.

A choice which limits your options.

 

[JimW]

That is interesting. Suppose it will be the same in india and africa, internet quicker than cars. How does online shopping work in china? What do you buy, where is it from, where do you pick it up?

Saul Goodman when we all get our helicopters, existing motorways will be sufficient.

Various big web portals that do almost anything plus a few direct businesses. Big ones have their own courier network then theres three or four other couriers cover even here. They fetch up in village about three times a day, phone you and you go and fetch your packages. We use them for things like bulk rice and soy sauce etc but wife Also sometimes gets meat and fish and even river crabs. Then they do all the Amazon type stuff like hardware and white goods too. No problem sending stuff back either.
Theyve kept going during lockdown when village was closed, just park up beyond one of the barriers and pass stuff over.

 

[JimW]

Should add portals like taobao are lots of small independent sellers alongside big boys.and have pretty much everything, some of it even not fake

 

[Saul Goodman]

If you compare Germany to the UK, they have a similar population density and similar land mass, yet Germany has much cleaner air, despite having considerably more cars. Could this be due to the fact that Germany has a much better motorway system, so vehicles aren't in a constant state of gridlock, unnecessarily spewing fumes into their surroundings?

One thing that getting rid of cars will definitely achieve is to make Jeff Bezoz immensely richer, although I somehow doubt that would bother teuchter. Indeed, it may well be part of his plan, as he likely has shares in the company.

 

[souljacker]

Years ago, I worked in a business park that was on the outskirts of a large town which had terrible traffic. There was a free shuttle bus from the station/centre of town that ran extremely frequently. Once it got past a certain point, there was a bus lane so it was faster going by bus than by car. Yet many of my colleagues would still drive to work from the centre of town and then moan about the traffic.

Made absolutely no sense to me but when I asked a colleague why he didn't take the bus, he said he'd have to walk ten minutes to get to the bus stop. I pointed out that driving took him more than an extra ten minutes given the bus lanes and he looked at me like I was mad. Until you can get past attitudes like that, I've no idea what you do (apart from possibly ban/reduce car parking space for places like that that are well served by public transport).

In Reading, there has been a lot of talk about charging companies for their parking spaces in an effort to deal with this issue. Cue mass moaning from the drivers.

Loads of the out of town office parks have free shuttle buses from the station but they are rarely used because they also have massive car parks. There is also the rather odd thing where the shuttle buses won't make stops en route so if you live on the shuttle bus route, you still need to go to the station to get on it. All it needs is a bit of joined up thinking IMO.

 

[Sue]

In Reading, there has been a lot of talk about charging companies for their parking spaces in an effort to deal with this issue. Cue mass moaning from the drivers.

Loads of the out of town office parks have free shuttle buses from the station but they are rarely used because they also have massive car parks. There is also the rather odd thing where the shuttle buses won't make stops en route so if you live on the shuttle bus route, you still need to go to the station to get on it. All it needs is a bit of joined up thinking IMO.

This was in fact in Reading -- I was working at TVP -- in the mid/late 2000s. The buses were always busy but you never needed to wait very long to get on one.

As I said though, even people who lived in central Reading (and the buses at that point did make a few stops en route) would still drive which I found quite incredible. And moan about the traffic.

 

[Clair De Lune]

A choice which limits your options.

Options for what exactly?

And like why is it only people who refuse to drive and those who genuinely need to (lack of mobility etc) that are asked to fight their cause and explain their motivations?
How would you justify your car usage to yourself and future generations? And could you see a way to change your lifestyle to suit a car free life? Cos it is possible, we're doing it, but it is a lifestyle choice for sure.

The second half isn't aimed purely at athos of course...I just wondered how you thought us not driving limited our options specifically.

 

[souljacker]

There is no way the traffic problems in Reading will ever be resolved if they continue to build massive car parks every time they build an office park. The funniest thing is the most vocal anti-car park charging people are also the most vocal traffic moaners. They just don't seem to get that they are part of the problem.

 

[SpookyFrank]

In Reading, there has been a lot of talk about charging companies for their parking spaces in an effort to deal with this issue. Cue mass moaning from the drivers.

Loads of the out of town office parks have free shuttle buses from the station but they are rarely used because they also have massive car parks. There is also the rather odd thing where the shuttle buses won't make stops en route so if you live on the shuttle bus route, you still need to go to the station to get on it. All it needs is a bit of joined up thinking IMO.

The logic of business parks is pretty mad when you break it down. Transport networks are centered on urban hubs, making these the easiest places to get to. Because lots of people can get to city centres, there are lots of customers and lots of workers, both good for businesses. Because of these two things, property values in urban centres go up. Then some clever sod goes, if we run our business on this brownfield site on the edge of nowhere, we can have more space for less money. Doesn't matter that there's no public transport, because people can drive there. You can't drive into the city centre these days anyway, because there's too much traffic. So everyone's a winner. Eventually so many businesses cotton on to this (including retail businesses which have learned to cluster together around vast car parks so they can share footfall) that city centres start to shrivel up, but they're still at the centre of the increasingly moribund public transport networks because roads and train lines and bus stations are tricky things to relocate. Any time property values in city centres start to drop gentrification kicks in to bump them up again, without necessarily providing anything useful in terms of jobs or services, but helping to maintain the pressure on businesses to gtfo to the suburbs, and thus keep workers and customers both dependent on cars.

The business parks we already have could serve a useful purpose though. They're ideally placed to served as distribution hubs for everything that needs to come to the city via HGV, allowing lower-impact 'last mile' logistics to take over from there. Businesses could still operate from traffic-reduced city centres, jobs could return to them, and everyone could have access to everything, not just those with cars.

 

[Athos]

Options for what exactly?

And like why is it only people who refuse to drive and those who genuinely need to (lack of mobility etc) that are asked to fight their cause and explain their motivations?
How would you justify your car usage to yourself and future generations? And could you see a way to change your lifestyle to suit a car free life? Cos it is possible, we're doing it, but it is a lifestyle choice for sure.

The second half isn't aimed purely at athos of course...I just wondered how you thought us not driving limited our options specifically.

Well, people without access to a car don't have the option to travel long distances as quickly, conveniently, and comfortably, relatively cheaply. In normal times, if I want to, I can jump in the car and visit a mate an hour's drive away; it just wouldn't be possible by public transport, so I'd lose that option. Similarly, going fishing, or lots of away games with football.

I've not asked anyone to explain their motivations.

I'd explain it that I avoided driving when it was easy to do so, but drove when it wasn't. I'd explain that was because I enjoy the freedom and convenience of driving, notwithstanding that it does have some social cost (like pretty much everything we do).

I could live without a car. But it'd be a less good life.

 

[Saul Goodman]

The only vehicles that should be allowed in city centres are Tuc Tucs, which would pick people up from a park 'n' ride at the outskirts of town, then race into the centre, with a minimum of 2 passengers and a maximum of 17. All other forms of transport should be banned from the centre, including buses and bicycles. If you don't want to walk in the centre of town, it's a Tuc Tuc, no other options.
No Tuc Tuc may exceed 400cc engine capacity, yet may be tuned to a maximum of 100bhp, while electric variants can be up to 1000W.
All buses/cars/bicycles, etc, must remain outside the town centre.
Minimum speed limits will apply to Tuc Tucs.

 

[dessiato]

The most equitable solution is obviously a mandatory tracking device in every car linked to HMRC and to a database containing your medical records and other personal information. Then the government could punitively tax people for unnecessary journeys, as the system would know whether you could have feasibly made the journey by public transport. There would be an appeals system of course, with an opportunity to provide documentary evidence to prove necessity, and there would also be Revenue & Customs agents conducting surveillence to make sure e.g. you weren't bunking off your GP appointment to go to a house party across the road.

Define what a necessary journey is please.

 

[WouldBe]

Coming back to this...

This is from the construction of the Westway. People's houses were bulldozed for it, and many people ended up living metres from a motorway. There were protests back then, of course. But would you even be able to do this at all, now?

HS2?

 

[Clair De Lune]

Well, people without access to a car don't have the option to travel long distances as quickly, conveniently, and comfortably, relatively cheaply. In normal times, if I want to, I can jump in the car and visit a mate an hour's drive away; it just wouldn't be possible by public transport, so I'd lose that option.

I've not asked anyone to explain their motivations.

I'd explain it that I avoided driving when it was easy to do so, but drove when it wasn't. I'd explain that was because I enjoy the freedom and convenience of driving, notwithstanding that it died have some social cost (like pretty much everything we do).

I could live without a car. But it'd be a less good life.

So someone who lives an hour's drive away is entirely inaccessible to you otherwise? I think I'm missing something here.

It's not just social cost though is It? Though that is huge- The car has enabled a selfish elitism that has costs to communities and local business. We all want to get places so quickly we dont stop to smell the roses, build connections and invest in our communities. It has massive environmental costs as well as political. Wars are waged for oil and petroleum and many lives are lost.

I'm pretty sure with a bit of creativity that your life could be just as good without a car.

 

[Athos]

So someone who lives an hour's drive away is entirely inaccessible to you otherwise? I think I'm missing something here.

It's not just social cost though is It? Though that is huge- The car has enabled a selfish elitism that has costs to communities and local business. We all want to get places so quickly we dont stop to smell the roses, build connections and invest in our communities. It has massive environmental costs as well as political. Wars are waged for oil and petroleum and many lives are lost.

I'm pretty sure with a bit of creativity that your life could be just as good without a car.

Yes, entirely inaccessible - there's no buses or trains in my village or his.

I stop to smell ther roses. I have connections and investment in my community. It's just that I have other options, too.

The environment is polluted and wars are waged for the fuel that produces electricity. Of which I'm sure you could use less. But, I daresay, you don't want to, because your life would be worse for it. Same thing.

It's great that, never having had a car, you don't miss one. But, knowing my lifestyle, I can say that my life definitely wouldn't be nearly as good without a car (as things stand): I'd have to give up gigging; wouldn't be able to shoot or fish; would get to a lot fewer football and cricket matches; see fewer bands; see a lot less of family and friends; not have the freedom to go where I want, when I want; shopping, medical appointments, etc. would be less convenient; I wouldn't be able to take and pick up my kids from their activities and friends.

 

[Saul Goodman]

We’re similar ages to you fella

I'd say you're definitely younger than me, but you're an outlier. You fall into that weird "I hate cars because mnerr" category.

 

[Orang Utan]

I'd say you're definitely younger than me, but you're an outlier. You fall into that weird "I hate cars because mnerr" category.

I think most of us on here are of a similar age. Your reasoning is faulty.
Yours,
A 47 year old smug cyclist (but not a MAMIL)

 

[Saul Goodman]

I think most of us on here are of a similar age. Your reasoning is faulty.
Yours,
A 47 year old smug cyclist (but not a MAMIL)

47 is relatively young. Most car haters have seats reserved for them at the front of the bus.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

47 is relatively young. Most car haters have seats reserved for them at the front of the bus.

42 here

 

[farmerbarleymow]

Cars are freedom for the individual and the family ..
Cars permit you to take jobs that otherwise wouldn't be possibly to take.
Cars save you loads of money compared to public transport if it even is available.
Cars permit you to live where you would like rather than being restricted to city centres.
Cars allow you to visit friends and family at a time of your choosing.
Cars let you go on holiday at home and abroad in the most flexible way possible.
Passing a driving test and getting a full driving licence is a rite of passage to adult life!

Fucking hell - are you on a retainer from the RAC or something?

Anyway, it's selfish attitudes like that that lead to the health and environmental problems that we're all facing.