Do you support the ULEZ expansion?

[icecream99]

Just curious as it is due to start at midnight tonight and could potentially cause a lot of chaos. I don't support it.

YANBU - I DON'T support ULEZ expansion

YABU - I DO support ULEZ expansion

You know the "Own nothing; be happy" thing stems from an essay submitted to the WEF by a Danish politician that was meant to instigate debate about tech development and goods / materials as a service, right? It is not, and has never been, an official view or part of the WEF.

It's amazing how many people focus in on a tiny, insignificant part of something and decide that must be the sole focus of the whole organisation. I mean there's also essays on there called "Sir Elton John: 5 leadership lessons from my darkest hours" and "Why art has the power to change the world". Do you also think the WEF are also secretly working to make us all buy Elton's autobiography and take up art classes?

There are also essays called "Five changes for sustainable health systems that put people first", "Prioritizing Racial and Ethnic Equity in Business", and "Women's economic empowerment is the right and smart thing to do". Why haven't you picked up on any of those as a "specific agenda" of the WEF? Why is it only ever "Own nothing; be happy" that gets attention?

On the topic of the thread, support ULEZ in principle but not in the way it is being implemented i.e., it's a good thing to work on improving air quality but not if it disproportionately impacts poorer people in society or if it can be circumnavigated by rich people.

@BrokeAsABone seriously?

Tin foil hat territory indeed.

What’s the plan? A ULEZ style fine every time we leave the house?
Lockdown only worked due to population compliance, long term there’s nothing police/army could have done about it due to resources.

Oh and no holidays? That would kill the leisure economy.

Presumably the govt would have to provide sch, hosp, shops, prisons, dentist etc within 15 mins walk there might be some benefits?
Though how would you staff them? Just within the 15mins?

The only problem with 15 minute cities is the tiresome conspiracy theorists that they seem to attract.

Britain has dire, run-down high streets and town centers due to lack of use, most of its population gets little to no exercise and is horribly out of shape, and British kids have less freedom and independence than just about anywhere else in Europe. A major factor behind the poor productivity of the UK compared with most of Europe is the fact that cities are so sprawling and people spend so much of their lives commuting, driving themselves and family members about from place to place, and circling around looking for parking. The point of 15 minute cities is to create setups where people can easily walk and bike to most of the things they need, keeping them fit and resulting in city centers and high streets that are economically viable, sociable and safe-feeling (rather than vaguely threatening places full of boarded-up shop fronts).

Nevertheless, quite a lot of Brits seem to hate the idea... while similtaneously moaning about all the problems I've mentioned (obesity, poor health, coddled kids who are driven around everywhere, nasty depressing high streets and city centers etc.).

Lots of tinfoil nutters here! All because they don't get sufficient money from the government to buy a car that complies.

We didn't have anywhere near the level of complaints when they banned smoking inside or lead free petrol. Neither affected peoples jobs or made it financially impossible for people. There's always some resistance to change but I this is way more than just a bit of resistance to change

It's funny how many of these ideas are called conspiracy theories...15 minute cities, pay per mile...then they come in and those who described us all as conspiracy theory nutters tell us that actually these things are in fact excellent ideas.

These things are brought in slowly...so ulez first, then pay per mile, then 15 minute cities, then you only get a certain number of days per year that you can leave your 15 minute city, then you have to apply to the government to leave, then you can't leave....ok this might sound extreme but if you let your freedoms get eroded away slowly, it's the ultimate result.

@whathaveiforgottentoday I worked in a pub when smoking van came in, trust me the howls of dismay were overwhelming.

Pubs, restaurants, clubs, dry cleaners etc were going to close (partially true TBF) mass associated unemployment, supermarkets would hike alcohol prices, human rights/civil liberties at stake, economy also hit by reduced tax take, children at danger due to reduced smoking at home.

If twitter had been a thing or Facebook wasn’t in infancy, it would defo be as it is now.

Letters to the papers found on a thirty second google search.
Indoor smoking ban
a) will destroy publicans' livelihoods
b) if smoking's so dangerous why don't they make it illegal?
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/letters-smoking-ban-5334223.html

100%

But with the smoking ban there was no direct financial benefit for the government so we could be confident it was genuinely being done to improve our health.

And cars aren't the only pollutant. Gas boilers, wood burners, air travel ....cars are just easier to monitor and charge.

I would have thought gas boilers were very easy to charge for - bills?

Well perhaps but people would be up in arms and any government that brought it in would be committing political suicide.

As I recall the French ban is very limited and only applies to domestic flights where there is a train alternative of less than 2.5hrs. Originally it was supposed to be 4hrs. If you wanted to include flights between London/Birmingham and the Scottish Central Belt into a similar ban to the original proposal, you need to speed up the trains - i.e. HS2.

Personally I'd go for the ban on any flights where a train of less than four hours is an option, and make this cover International journeys too. London - Paris/Brussels is already around two hours, London - Amsterdam/Cologne four hours.

Construction is temporary. And of course it stops somewhere. It stops twice in London, then in Birmingham and Manchester with links to Liverpool and Scotland. Supposed to connect to Derby, Nottingham, Leeds and Newcastle too.

It never ceases to amaze me how people complain about the lack of public transport infrastructure in this country compared to the rest of the developed world, and then whinge when the government actually does something about it.

If you're worried about destruction of the countryside, take a look at the M40. Six lanes and carries far fewer people.

I haven't complained about public transport in particular but it is not benefiting the people in the local vicinity just making their lives more difficult

I support it, but I think it should be done like Glasgow where you are just fined if non-compliant…no buying your way in.

Getting rid of his traffic calming and bike lanes might well make a difference, particularly if you live in central London which seems to be one long traffic jam.

@grass321 cars cause traffic jams, not bikes. If more people got out of their cars and cycled there would be no traffic jams.

No one had invented Twitter then so there was no echo chamber to whinge into.

I do get a bit tired of cycling always being touted as the answer to everything.

Where I live, it is extremely hilly. Like even the Lycra-clad riders struggle with the hills. So I'm not sure how I'm supposed to manage them, really, unless I buy an expensive electric bike (and good luck with that not being nicked when it's parked up in Croydon...)

My 15yo son is not disabled, but due to a genetic condition he is the size of a very underweight 9yo. Some days his school bag weighs almost as much as he does! E bikes aren't an option for him because he is not big enough to ride one. Even if he was, he's completely deaf and so I don't think it would really be very safe.

If TfL had bothered making any improvements to public transport around here then maybe I wouldn't be so cross. But there has been zero effort by them, absolutely none. Instead it's entirely up to the general public to make all the effort and take on all the costs. If you want people to give up their cars, then you need to give them decent alternatives.

@Comedycook the smoking ban was a massive benefit to tbe government - It was one of the most successful public health interventions in decades.

Smoking and smoking related diseases cost the NHS millions as sell as the related productivity issues caused by long term ill health from smoking.

You need to adjust you tinfoil hat.

Agreed.

Anyone who flies from London to Paris is a loon unless they are transferring at Heathrow

You haven't got a clue what a 15 minute neighbourhood is, have you?

It's one where all basic facilities (shops, public transport, doctor's, primary schools etc.) are available within easy walking distance of one's home. If you want to go further then you simply walk the short distance to the bus stop and travel to where you want to go. What's wrong with any of that?

Well if you sell your car the government won't be getting any money out of you, just as they won't be if you give up smoking.

I remember the shrieks of horror when the smoking ban came in. The words was going to end as every pubs across the land closed their doors.

They closed for deep cleans as it turned out smoking was hiding the fact they stank.

Then the world carried on