You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
As I keep saying, it's not what you say that pisses people off, it's the way you say it.
Sorry about that. I am however fairly certain that if I simply agreed with whatever opinions other people dared to express no one would be "pissed off".
Edit: And btw this is just another pointless distraction - instead of yet again talking about me how about actually discussing ulez?
Any comments about the points I raised, such as the cutbacks in bus services every year since 2016 and the need to encourage people to use public transport?
Really? Is it really that difficult to figure out that I agree with the Labour Leader and the Mayor of Manchester that now, in the middle of a cost of living crises, isn’t the right time to hit struggling families?
It's definitely that, and not the fact that you had to trade your BMW for a Peugeot.
Are we back to talking about me? I can only assume that challenging the points that I have made, such as why wasn't the whole of London included in the ulez in 2021, and why the lack of investment in bus services, is too difficult to do so it is just easier to move the discussion away from that and focus instead on me personally.
I am now being castigated for being disadvantaged by the ulez expansion, apparently that is the "real" reason why I am opposed to its expansion.
And yet here on stw people who aren't being disadvantaged by ulez are being ridiculed because 'it doesn't even affect them'.
Apparently the worse sort of people are those who complain about the expansion even though it doesn't affect them, and those that complain about ulez because it affects them.
Ridiculous double standards at its finest.
For the record I did take a financial hit due to the ulez expansion but because I was in a position to be able to afford to take the financial hit that it caused it was more an inconvenience than a question of going hungry or foregoing a holiday.
For some people replacing their non compliant vehicles wasn't a serious problem, for some it was more difficult, and for others it has had a profound effect.
How much it has affected people very much reflects their financial situation. As a bit of a lefty that is not something I am either very comfortable with or what I expect from a Labour administration.
ULEZ Doesn’t affect me in any way, aside better air when I visit and I’m all for it. However it dawned on me that if my local council decided it was going to happen here, I can see it’d be disastrous for the people that live in the same suburb as me.
Lots of self employed trades with older vans, cars purchased to reliably get people to work that, before the rise in used car prices would be one failed MOT from the scrap yard.
Perhaps if wages at the lower end had kept pace with the top end, the polluting cars would be gone anyway.
The elderly gardener who lives across the road has an immaculate white van which is not compliant, I'm not sure what it is but quite large for all his tools, possibly a Volkswagen.
It only has 50k on the clock. He can't afford to replace it like for like so he has told me that he will pay the ulez charge and add the cost to his customers. Luckily for him he has far more customers than he needs (he's well past retirement age) so he can afford to do that.
Are we still refusing to discuss ulez and instead employing diversionary tactics?
Squirrelking makes a comment claiming that ulez revenues will be used to improve transport links. When it is suggested that more likely it will be used to plug the huge financial hole in TfL's budget after the pandemic, that after all is what Sadiq Khan promised the Westminster government, and it is also pointed out that TfL has disinvested in bus services every year since Sadiq Khan became Mayor, the discussion concerning ulez suddenly stops as everyone focuses on attacking the person who dared to challenge a comment made by squirrelking.
Suddenly the discussion focuses on shit stirring and trolling.
Presumably no reasonable person ever questions a comment made by squirrelking?
Are we back to talking about me?
That is probably because
A) your posts are sometimes every other post in a thread (see this page as an example and
B) you are just provoking arguments with pettiness and attempted point scoring
C) you seem to put more effort into non bike related topics on an MTB forum that I do on my full time job
If a number of people are giving you the same feedback it may be worth reacting to is positively rather than not accepting it and saying it is just because they disagree with you...
I’m sure that the Manchester CAZ (for all it’s faults) was going to have grants for replacement/retrofitting of non-compliant commercial vehicles. Is there no similar scheme for the London ULEZ?
I’m sure that the Manchester CAZ (for all it’s faults) was going to have grants for replacement/retrofitting of non-compliant commercial vehicles. Is there no similar scheme for the London ULEZ?
No. There was a £2k scrappage scheme for various classes of people who have a non compliant car (disabled or unemployed for example) until 7 days before the deadline, whereby it was then extended to “everybody” at short notice.
There was a separate scheme for commercial vans…
https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/scrappage-schemes/van-minibus
No. There was a £2k scrappage scheme for various classes of people who have a non compliant car (disabled or unemployed for example) until 7 days before the deadline, whereby it was then extended to “everybody” at short notice.
Has it closed? Surely not, anyone can now apply (London residents, at least; doesn’t help those that live outside but travel in to work)
All London residents are eligible for the grant to purchase compliant vehicles, including a switch to bikes, e-bikes and cargo bikes.
Businesses are also set to receive more financial help with the grant per van being raised from £5,000 to £7,000 and the number of vans or minibuses small businesses and sole traders can scrap will increase to three – meaning small businesses could get £21,000 for a greener fleet.
Minibus payments will also be increased, as will the payments for switching to an electric vehicle, meaning some businesses could secure even higher levels of support.
what vehicles were those? The last vehicle specific incentive I remember was charge point grants and before that LPG conversion grants on petrol back in about 2005.
Diesels generally, the rejig of the VED and Company Car tax regime to change the balance between Petrol and Diesel engine cars - This article gives a reasonable background analysis. On the day that a Judge is appointed to the Letby Inquiry, it is worth wondering why there has been no Inquiry into this dumb policy that likely killed an order of magnitude more people.
[As far as EL is concerned, he is one of the few reasons I bother coming to this forum now, he can be interesting and has some wit, unlike the full timers who I find exceedingly dull and dim. And commentating on people's posting styles or accusing them of trolling is exceedingly ****tish behaviour so I apologise for that.]
VED is fair enough. I meant actual buyers rather than leasing but since it feeds the second hand market I'll concede that point as well.
this dumb policy that likely killed an order of magnitude more people.
It's sort of startling that people who say they hate Labour/the Government are also pretending that Gordon Brown not putting quite as high VED supplements on high-polluting diesels as
high-polluting petrols 20 years ago was a cast iron instruction to buy diesels forever because they're good for the environment.
£20 off VED was never as important to the rise of diesels as the global auto industry working out how to make them smaller, more fuel-efficient, and cleaner than they were before. (Or, as it turns out, how to fake the tests to make it appear that way. Looking forward to hearing how that was Gordon Brown's fault too).
With the best will in the world, the impact of Labour's tax policy particularly the company car tax regime under both Brown and Darling was recognized both at the time and since in both the specialist and main stream press as being a key driver to the increase to diesel cars sales. To question this is frankly delusional. On the bright side you are well qualified to join Trump's campaign staff.
He can’t afford to replace it like for like so he has told me that he will pay the ulez charge and add the cost to his customers.
This is a) obvious (his fee I guess also includes provision for fuel and products used) and b) does dilute the idea of the whole thing.
I have a non compliant car, live outside the zone but occasionally will be required to go in it for work. Apart from an annual visit to heathrow I dont think I have a personal reason to travel there.
We'll be charging customers an extra £25 (to include our internal time of administration as well as the fee). I won't be changing my vehicle for the benefit of my employer, nor do they expect me to.
There is no possible location in London where this extra cost will change my descision of mode of transport for work purposes. So net reduction in harmful urban emissions from me (2013 diesel) will be nothing.
There will be an extraction of money from Londoners* and London businesses into the government coffers though.
*In relation to my business, the only private house projects we get in London will be in multi million pound houses so don't get too upset about it affecting the poor financially.