GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
limited dogmatic approach to all things is why...
Proposal to ban private cars from public roads
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
limited dogmatic approach to all things is why...
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I think this is all covered in the OP.
The idea is to reduce the number of journeys made by car due to the marginal cost to the owner being relatively small.
Additionally, to create a situation where there are less obstacles to introducing new and better public transport services.
More people would have access to a car but for each person, a larger proportion of their travelling would be viable/attractive by PT.
mauvais
on reddit or something
See, both of these are wrong.
Let's suppose I don't have a car. I go everywhere by bike or bus. Shopping, luggage, long journeys or remote destinations are a pain but I get by because I don't want to spend £6k+ on the first year of car ownership.
Tomorrow, General Teutcher overthrows the government and introduces his mad scheme. Now I have access to everyone's cars. I start using them for the above whereas previously I would have made do without. Soon it's not for shopping or trips where the bike is impractical, it's for going everywhere. Well done, you've made it worse. The only way to fix it is price me out, which you could have done to everyone else through fuel duty in the first place.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
I have beef with horses- not going into it now
I still recon a nippy but not fuel guzzling 125cc bike is viable and fair for cities, I'd go so far as to say private cars in cities could be rendered useless for certain people. Exemption from CC, private m/bike parking areas tax breaks etc. I'm no architect or systems designer but I recon it might work.. The idea being reduce city congestion while investing in a nationwide rail/coach/bus service. Preff one that doesn't make me pay 20 quid for a Heathrow-Northampton return and then leaves me twiddling my thumbs for three fucking hours on the return journey.
stupid dogbot
Haughty and Superior
*never mind*
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
The rich could be ferried around in palanquins:
Employing 4 people at a time, they get a good workout too. Saving money for the NHS.
Employing 4 people at a time, they get a good workout too. Saving money for the NHS.
trashpony
Hag
No it isn't. Right now my car is outside my house with my (very heavy) child seat in it. How do I get it to the car-share car?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
Deny that your motorcycles are not powerful toys that you absolutely love but are impractical transport over distance
in the interests of simple logistics a low powered motorcycle is perfect for a one rider in a car choked city I recon
But I also know m/c riders like to tear the arse out of the machine if it is a hobby bike. that would mean scoping out the right areas of b roads to rag it on etc., but I'm sure plenty of people would be able to do that themselves
mauvais
on reddit or something
More specifically, this - I've paid so much I must get my money's worth - is not so much as wrong as too weak to support your policy. The costs are as I said earlier: buying the car, depreciation, a reduced proportion of maintenance, insurance and tax.
Depreciation is broadly invisible unless you're buying new, or in some ways, a car at the end of its life. Buying a car is a one off cost, and in my case, it's identified as buying me a capability that I wouldn't otherwise have. Now insurance (especially the baseline cost that won't reduce over time), tax and non-distance related maintenance are 'money's worth' factors to me. This is because they're not related to how much I use it, so faced with having to pay them, logically I should either sell the car or use it enough. I'm not selling the car because I'll lose the capability I paid for, so I'll use it more instead.
That's solvable by making the cost of motoring truly usage related such that each journey incurs a cost. Private ownership is not incompatible.
spacemonkey
I Love Noodles
I would like to see a massive roll out of electric cars, with a smart grid that can take advantage of lulls in energy demand.
It wouldn't be cheap, or easy, but the benefits would be massive.
I can't imagine how pleasant cities could become with electric cars - quiet and (tailpipe) emission free. This improvement in air quality could also see a dramatic increase in cyclists.
Range is still an issue, but within 5 years I think battery technology will have improved sufficiently to provide a range of about 300 miles per charge. People in the sticks could get by with plug-in hybrids for the extra range. Hopefully the battery techology could also improve electric bikes, I think there is a huge potential market for these in the future.
The lease system discussed would work well in this case, as the batteries would need to be replaced quicker than the vehicles.
Here is a photo of an electric mini I took recently, they are currently trialing these in Scotland, powered by Hydro electricity.
It wouldn't be cheap, or easy, but the benefits would be massive.
I can't imagine how pleasant cities could become with electric cars - quiet and (tailpipe) emission free. This improvement in air quality could also see a dramatic increase in cyclists.
Range is still an issue, but within 5 years I think battery technology will have improved sufficiently to provide a range of about 300 miles per charge. People in the sticks could get by with plug-in hybrids for the extra range. Hopefully the battery techology could also improve electric bikes, I think there is a huge potential market for these in the future.
The lease system discussed would work well in this case, as the batteries would need to be replaced quicker than the vehicles.
Here is a photo of an electric mini I took recently, they are currently trialing these in Scotland, powered by Hydro electricity.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
There's no doubt that simply pricing people out is the easiest way to do it. Sometimes I'm tempted to say, well, no-one really needs to live a lifestyle where a car is necessary. So, just make it really expensive and people will just have to move into towns, or be less lazy, or get rich, to deal with it.
That kind of approach isn't generally very popular though. It's funny to see people suggesting it as preferable on this thread by the way because I'm used to being accused of being some kind of Nazi any time I suggest people should just change their lifestyle to reduce their car dependancy.
So this scheme is my suggestion as to how to reduce dependance on the car whilst also making transport options more equally available to everyone.
In your example: I don't think you'd suddenly start using the car for everything. It's not going to be free - it would be priced higher than public transport. So you might use it once a week or so to get heavy shopping, but you'd continue to use your bike or the bus most of the time. Yes you would increase your amount of car use by a bit. But consider the situation two years on where you have got a £3k pay rise. In the current scenario, this would be the point at which you might be sorely tempted to spend that 6k on car ownership. And once you'd done that, the additional per mile cost of using your already-paid-for car would be less than getting the bus and low enough that you'd get lazy and stop cycling, so you might well end up using it every day and for journeys where it really isn't necessary.
Whereas, under my scheme, the 3k richer Mauvais might use the car slightly more, because you could afford it, but you'd continue to use the bus or bike where equally convenient because why wouldn't you when they are cheaper, and better as a result of my amazing scheme having been in place for a few years..
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
people with children will be banned from cars under this proposal in fact it's the only reasonable or workable option ...
and should be implemented forthwith you decide to breed no car for you ever...
trashpony
Hag
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
Thought so
still if you have 4 of them then the palanquins idea comes back into play and everyones a winner...
teuchter
je suis teuchter
So just tell me how you achieve this. How do you shift those up-front costs to being costs that are paid proportionately to usage, whilst the car is in your private ownership. And also how you make this special kind of private ownership accessible to those that can't currently afford to own a car.
trashpony
Hag
still if you have 4 of them then the palanquins idea comes back into play and everyones a winner...
I could put wheels on the baby seats and they could carry me along. I'm going to throw the word palanquins into casual conversation tomorrow. When I'm at an off roading skills day
stupid dogbot
Haughty and Superior
Thought so
On the plus side, people who are already using public transport will be completely unaffected. Even
er. 
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
a) the upfront costs are those which cannot be afforded by those who currently don't have a car...
b) you're suggesting mitigating those costs to provide a car to those currently car less
c) the costs which are being refereed to aren't upfront costs but cost of usage in terms of carbon footprint and social detriment.
if you can't even understand the terms under discussion here why bother with the OP?
mauvais
on reddit or something
In the first instance, re-regulate the insurance market so it must be PAYG. Get rid of road tax and add it to fuel duty or another mileage based cost. Toll roads and congestion charging. Nationalise car sales and regulate prices so you can sell a car immediately and incur no loss.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
A proportion of share-cars will have child seats built in. Or perhaps there will be an allowance where people can reserve a specific car for their use for the time period where their children are of the age that they need child seats. There would be all sorts of details like this to be worked out but I don't see something like this as a big enough issue to make the system unworkable.
Also, remember that although there could be a slight added inconvenience to you as a parent who currently owns a car, there are lots of parents at the moment who have to get by without a car at all because they can't afford it. And the improved public transport system will reduce the number of journeys where a car is necessary in the first place.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
mauvais makes more sense than you on this, teuchter.
I agree with spacemonkey that our best hope in the medium term is the replacement of petrol with cars powered by electricity generated in cleaner ways. That's something that, with the political will, we could achieve in 20-30 years.
I agree with spacemonkey that our best hope in the medium term is the replacement of petrol with cars powered by electricity generated in cleaner ways. That's something that, with the political will, we could achieve in 20-30 years.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
I could put wheels on the baby seats and they could carry me along. I'm going to throw the word palanquins into casual conversation tomorrow. When I'm at an off roading skills day
you could add a little motor to the wheeled baby chariot too and a steering wheel, hmmm and you better have some brakes added to it too. Thinking about it if you had a set of gears to the baby seat this would make it a lot easier to go up hills or backwards. You could also have some kind of roof like cover to stop you getting wet when it rains or indeed sunburnt when it's not... and a sort of wind visor which screened off the wind from in front of you and might otherwise blow dust in babys eyes... like a wind screen...
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
only one of those is reasonable. fuel rationing.
the other two increase profit as a by product and do not do anything to remove cars from the road.
the last point merely limits cars to things like the old british leyland cars... which were inefficient rubbish...
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Should have gone to specsavers
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
nationalise car sales, not production
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I'm not convinced doing all that is any more feasible (realistically) than what I'm proposing. And how does it make cars more accessible to the less well off? They would still have to pay the up-front purchase price at the very least, no?
Also, it would not have the advantage of more efficient use of resources. Most cars would still be sitting unused 90% of the time.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
why would any manufacture wish to make a car at x cost to have their profits limited by a state... the production would also need to be state run, as they wouldn't sell to any market which did this...
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
They would sell to any market that would give them a profit. Drug companies don't refuse to sell drugs to the NHS because it is nationalised.
I'm not convinced on this point, as I'm not sure what nationalising sales would achieve, but it could be a boon to manufacturers by guaranteeing them a price.
