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

[teuchter]

I'm sure there are plenty of alternatives that suit some people. Others find e.g. public transport unpleasant and inconvenient, or bikes dangerous. I'd rather the alternatives were made better, such that people want to use them, rather than force them to do something they don't want to. That would be a win-win for everybody, no?

That would be having your cake and eating it, because, for example if you want to improve bus reliability you need to decrease congestion. If you want to make cycling less dangerous you need to reduce road capacity for motor vehicles.

Of course in principle the alternatives have to be made better as well as the disincentives being put in place. But most places where the "15 minute city" is being pursued, there is already good public transport. Places like inner London, or Oxford. And no-one is being prevented outright from doing a journey by car, it is being made somewhat more inconvenient.

There is a rebalancing of priorities. If your starting point is that the status quo is "fair" - that is there are those with cars and those without, and everyone's kind of equal, then any inconvenience imposed on car drivers is seen as persecution.

On the other point, if you can see that the status quo involves maintaining massive privilege in favour of car owners at the expense of everyone else, then what's a fair rebalancing looks different.

 

[teuchter]

No. I don't know if there are any; I've not looked. But, even if they're aren't, it doesn't mean there can't be.

And if there are no places where it's succeeded, and several places where it's been attempted and has failed, what should the conclusion then be?

 

[Athos]

And if there are no places where it's succeeded, and several places where it's been attempted and has failed, what should the conclusion then be?

That the methods they tried in those times and places didn't work. It doesn't necessarily follow that there are no less coercive measures than what's being proposed that could succeed in UK cities now.

 

[teuchter]

That the methods they tried in those times and places didn't work. It doesn't necessarily follow that there are no less coercive measures than what's being proposed that could succeed in UK cities now.

Ok, so what are your specific ideas or proposals... things that no-one else has previously thought to try?

 

[Athos]

That would be having your cake and eating it, because, for example if you want to improve bus reliability you need to decrease congestion. If you want to make cycling less dangerous you need to reduce road capacity for motor vehicles.

Of course in principle the alternatives have to be made better as well as the disincentives being put in place. But most places where the "15 minute city" is being pursued, there is already good public transport. Places like inner London, or Oxford. And no-one is being prevented outright from doing a journey by car, it is being made somewhat more inconvenient.

There is a rebalancing of priorities. If your starting point is that the status quo is "fair" - that is there are those with cars and those without, and everyone's kind of equal, then any inconvenience imposed on car drivers is seen as persecution.

On the other point, if you can see that the status quo involves maintaining massive privilege in favour of car owners at the expense of everyone else, then what's a fair rebalancing looks different.

I accept that there's some chicken-and-egg.

And I don't necessarily disagree with all of the measures you'd no doubt favour e.g. better cycle lanes, even if that would mean some disruption to motorists.

But the measures propsed in Oxford seem to me to be an unwarranted infingement on existing freedoms.

I completely accept that those freedoms historically reflect (perhaps undue) prviledge to motorists. And maybe if we were staying from scratch I'd have favoured a better balance. But the state taking away existing freedoms that'll have a really significant impact on people's lives isn't something we should welcome lightly.

So I would continue to favour carrots over sticks, even really radical ones like financially incentivising people to forego car ownership, or free ebikes for everyone.

In the meantime, even in areas where you think public transport is good, I'm sure that there's more that can be done to improve it before having cars e.g. making it free. Alongside making more stuff available locally - part of the 15 minute city I like.

 

[farmerbarleymow]

Have discovered that I am Part of the Problem, because my car is the same height as a Ford Puma, despite being neither a van nor an SUV. I'm surprised no-one has slashed my tyres yet, although they did get the shit punctured out of them while they were throwing up those flats in Hackbridge.

Just cut the top of the car off to reduce the height. Wear some wooly gloves and stuff to keep warm while you're driving in colder weather.

 

[maomao]

Just cut the top of the car off to reduce the height.

Cut about a foot and a half off, with driver at wheel.

 

[teuchter]

I accept that there's some chicken-and-egg.

And I don't necessarily disagree with all of the measures you'd no doubt favour e.g. better cycle lanes, even if that would mean some disruption to motorists.

But the measures propsed in Oxford seem to me to be an unwarranted infingement on existing freedoms.

I completely accept that those freedoms historically reflect (perhaps undue) prviledge to motorists. And maybe if we were staying from scratch I'd have favoured a better balance. But the state taking away existing freedoms that'll have a really significant impact on people's lives isn't something we should welcome lightly.

So I would continue to favour carrots over sticks, even really radical ones like financially incentivising people to forego car ownership, or free ebikes for everyone.

In the meantime, even in areas where you think public transport is good, I'm sure that there's more that can be done to improve it before having cars e.g. making it free. Alongside making more stuff available locally - part of the 15 minute city I like.

Carrot measures - especially radical ones - mean spending a lot of public money. You have to make that politically attractive.

It's very hard to make massive spending on public transport attractive to a car dependent population.

On the other hand, people who were previously mainly using their cars, but who have been "coerced" into using an ok (but could be better) public transport system, will be much more invested in improving that system (and more likely to vote for measures that fund it more adequately).

Remember, non car owners are putting up with inadequate public transport every day because measures to inprove it are rejected by car owning majorities in many places.

As for making more services available locally - like grocery shops - how actually do you achieve this through carrot only? Subsidies? Because those local shops usually have to compete with big supermarkets with lots of infrastructure supporting them and making them as convenient as possible for those with cars. You can't just provide a big car park for the corner shop. You need to create a situation where someone who lives ten minutes walk away, but has a car and a supermarket a convenient 15 minutes drive away, decides it's more attractive to go to their local shop three times a week than the supermarket once a week, possibly on their way home from work because they are already driving there already. How do we attack this situation with carrots only?

 

[Athos]

Carrot measures - especially radical ones - mean spending a lot of public money. You have to make that politically attractive.

It's very hard to make massive spending on public transport attractive to a car dependent population.

On the other hand, people who were previously mainly using their cars, but who have been "coerced" into using an ok (but could be better) public transport system, will be much more invested in improving that system (and more likely to vote for measures that fund it more adequately).

Remember, non car owners are putting up with inadequate public transport every day because measures to inprove it are rejected by car owning majorities in many places.

As for making more services available locally - like grocery shops - how actually do you achieve this through carrot only? Subsidies? Because those local shops usually have to compete with big supermarkets with lots of infrastructure supporting them and making them as convenient as possible for those with cars. You can't just provide a big car park for the corner shop. You need to create a situation where someone who lives ten minutes walk away, but has a car and a supermarket a convenient 15 minutes drive away, decides it's more attractive to go to their local shop three times a week than the supermarket once a week, possibly on their way home from work because they are already driving there already. How do we attack this situation with carrots only?

Yes, I get that carrots might be more expensive, and possibly less effective. Nevertheless, I still think that approach is better than welcoming the state radically curtailing existing freedoms in a way that (currently, at least) most people don't want because (rightly or wrongly) they belive it'll have a net negative effect on their quality of life.

 

[liquidindian]

I would like things to work this way too. But they don't.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Yes, I get that carrots might be more expensive, and possibly less effective. Nevertheless, I still think that approach is better than welcoming the state radically curtailing existing freedoms in a way that (currently, at least) most people don't want because (rightly or wrongly) they belive it'll have a net negative effect on their quality of life.

Somebody should do a film of this.

 

[teuchter]

radically curtailing existing freedoms

Just to calibrate my understanding of what you call "radical curtailment" are you referring to things like making some roads no-through roads such that people have to drive a less convenient route to get somewhere? Or something else?

 

[Athos]

Just to calibrate my understanding of what you call "radical curtailment" are you referring to things like making some roads no-through roads such that people have to drive a less convenient route to get somewhere? Or something else?

I think you (deliberately) understate the level of inconvenience the Oxford proposal will cause to ordinary people trying to go about their normal lives e.g. get to work. I could well see the forced diversions adding a significant time to many people's commute.

 

[teuchter]

I haven't stated anything about the level of inconvenience caused by the Oxford proposals as I haven't even looked at what they are yet: I was asking what "radical curtailment" meant to you. That language suggests something more dramatic than "inconvenience" to me.

 

[edcraw]

This is Mayfair. Crazy how were prioritising tanks over people in central London.

 

[platinumsage]

Emergency statement presumably because they failed to publicise their plans appropriately:

Joint statement from Oxfordshire County Council and Oxford City Council on Oxford’s traffic filters – Oxford City Council

Staff and councillors at both councils have been subjected to abuse due to inaccurate information, being circulated online, about traffic filters.

www.oxford.gov.uk

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I think you (deliberately) understate the level of inconvenience the Oxford proposal will cause to ordinary people trying to go about their normal lives e.g. get to work. I could well see the forced diversions adding a significant time to many people's commute.

If only there were other ways they could get to work.

 

[Athos]

I haven't stated anything about the level of inconvenience caused by the Oxford proposals as I haven't even looked at what they are yet: I was asking what "radical curtailment" meant to you. That language suggests something more dramatic than "inconvenience" to me.

I've been talking about the Oxford proposal.

I guess it's a matter of degree; there's a point at which inconvenience becomes so significant as to amount to a serious reduction in someone's quality of life.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Not being able to drive whenever and wherever you want is not a “serious reduction in someone’s quality of life” ffs

 

[Athos]

If only there were other ways they could get to work.

Yes, that's what I'd like to see. Other equally good (or better) ways to get to work. If what they considered a comfortable, reliable, cost-effective alternative existed then fewer people would choose to use cars.

 

[Athos]

Not being able to drive whenever and wherever you want is not a “serious reduction in someone’s quality of life” ffs

It is for a lot of people; it represents a freedom and convenience they value greatly.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

It is for a lot of people; it represents a freedom and convenience they value greatly.

They can get a grip and fuck right off at the same time.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

It is for a lot of people; it represents a freedom and convenience they value greatly.

They can get a grip and fuck right off at the same time.

 

[Athos]

They can get a grip and fuck right off at the same time.

I'm sorry it angers you that some people think differently from you.

 

[platinumsage]

They can get a grip and fuck right off at the same time.

So it's your way or the highway?

 

[edcraw]

Emergency statement presumably because they failed to publicise their plans appropriately:

Joint statement from Oxfordshire County Council and Oxford City Council on Oxford’s traffic filters – Oxford City Council

Staff and councillors at both councils have been subjected to abuse due to inaccurate information, being circulated online, about traffic filters.

www.oxford.gov.uk

Yes - they should have really made clear from the outset

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

So it's your way or the highway?

Absolutely

 

[teuchter]

I've been talking about the Oxford proposal.

I guess it's a matter of degree; there's a point at which inconvenience becomes so significant as to amount to a serious reduction in someone's quality of life.

Can you give us an example of a journey in Oxford that will be affected in such a way by the current proposals?

 

[Athos]

Can you give us an example of a journey in Oxford that will be affected in such a way by the current proposals?

I'm not sufficiently familiar with the area, but it's clear from the local response that many feel it'll have that effect.

 

[teuchter]

I'm not sufficiently familiar with the area, but it's clear from the local response that many feel it'll have that effect.

So to summarise:

• you don't know the area
• you don't know the specifics of the proposals
• you don't have any specific alternatives to propose
• your opinion that freedoms are being radically curtailed is based on media reports that some people there are unhappy.