|
John Humphrys in The S/Times is rather depressing today.
|
Humphries is part of the BPC anti motoring mafia. He's why I stopped listening to Radio 4.
HJ
|
|
|
|
Isn't it funny how those who claim we don't pay enough for our motoring either don't drive themselves, or earn a salary most people would consider to be equivalent to a decent lottery win.
|
|
Tom - I don't claim that we don't pay enough for our motoring, but the amount of driving done by just about everyone suggests that it is not prohibitively expensive. Even when our fuel costs more than anyone else's, it seems that no-one makes many economies. And I do drive myself (though nowhere near as far as some) and I don't earn a salary equivalent to a lottery win. However being retired, I don't have to drive to earn my crust. I think I have learnt not to waste time and energy whingeing about life.
|
|
|
|
Spot on Tom..... Also the people being interviewed on TV from the various anti-motoring brigades in all guises. I do so want to ask them how they got to the studios and if they own or are ever driven in a car.
Alvin
|
|
|
Some might find this of interest:
www.scottishsecretary.gov.uk/Publications/motoring...m
That was the survey by the green cycling and walking consultants, consultants to you know who's dome, for you know who, that said that out motoring taxes were "average". Allegedly.
Couple of salient points: the consultants themselves say that European motorway tolls have an insignificant impact on the average drivers motoring costs.
And we are only average if you include full car purchase taxes.
But if you check out the notes you will find that these are often "optional" (eg rebates for airbags - not many qualify for those then!;-)
If you ignore purchase taxes, we move up a little, to, ermmmm, top ......... of all the league tables :-(
Hmmmmmmmmm
www.bogush.fsnet.co.uk/Ecology.htm#MotoringTaxSurv...y
|
|
It's curious that motoring is to some a necessity, to some a hobby, to some both, but whatever, the anti-car brigade are busting their guts (well, we wish they would) with a lot of success to take all the fun out of it. Yet, they want it taxed as a luxury as well!
|
|
|
|
Alvin
I also bet that those who walk or cycle to work and buy everything in the local shop seem to imagine that there is an invisible railway running on renewable fuel which delivers everything to those places.
|
|
|
Alvin
I also bet that those who walk or cycle to work and buy everything in the local shop seem to imagine that there is an invisible railway running on renewable fuel which delivers everything to those places.
|
|
|
|
Realistically driving does seem to be more affordable now than it ever was. Maybe one answer to the congestion problem is smaller cars. There is a trend this way eg Ka, Smart, A class, small Audi etc. If everyone drove a small car, there would be more room on the roads, and each parking bay would take 2 cars. Cars below say Fiesta size, could be exempt from tax discs. Growler could still have his V8. V8 powered Smart.......wow!
|
|
|
|
What's / who's "BPC" please, honjon ??
|
I'd suspect "Blair's Propaganda Corporation"...
used to be known as the british broadcorping castration, or something similar ...
|
|
|
|
There's a comment on Humphry's article in the Sunday Telegraph here:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F...l
Under Speed is not the real killer on our roads, Christopher Booker's Notebook (Filed: 03/02/2002).
|
|
|
"Also the people being interviewed on TV from the various anti-motoring brigades in all guises. I do so want to ask them how they got to the studios and if they own or are ever driven in a car."
A few years ago the anti road protestors - including 'Swampy' IIRC on the M6 parked up dozens of vans/cars etc.
A moral victory to the motoring lobby I reckon...
|
|
|
In reply to mybrainhurts BPC = Broadcasting Politically Correct. I believe the organisation responsible used to be known as British Broadcasting Corporation.
HJ
|
|
|
Thought so, thanks honjon.
Time Blair's Buddy Club was wound up, methinks...........
|
|
|
Once upon a time there was only one TV channel, financed by a licence fee levied on those who could afford a TV set, which was expensive.
And it was boring.
Along came commercial TV, financed by advertising, and it was good.
So the original broadcaster renamed its first channel BBC1 and set up BBC2, which was to be intellectual and show the workers what they were missing.
And the licence fee was increased to cover the cost. And it was boring.
So the BBC sent out programmes for the brain-dead on BBC1. And it was boring.
And the commercial companies set up Channel 4, subsidised by the adverts on Channel 3, catering for some minority interests. And they all found that there was not enough local material to fill all four channels, so they filled in the spaces with American films.
And the BBC found that the workers were not inclined to watch stimulating programmes on BBC2, so they made the content similar to BBC1.
And Channel 5 was brought in.
So now its all boring.
|
|
|
