The whole area is homogeneous in vernacular, and if people like it that way, fine by me.
Modernist eyesore? What crap! We don;t have modern architecture in this country. The T&C planning act abolished it.
NO! You mean "paid for", by taxing the population who do not use public transport. There is no such thing as "free transport", apart perhaps from walking!
Regards Capitol
Like any house, they get damp if not maintained (leaking gutters, damaged
Praise indeed!!
Regards Capitol
^ majority of the
Spot on.
Er, my council tax pays for schools. I don't have any children. Go figure!
MM
Those children will pay your pension and healthcare costs when you are old! ( If you're fortunate enough to survive that long.) Regards Capitol
How much then?
MM
Tsk, tsk. That particular Ponzi scheme will collapse long before any of us get any benefit from it.
Presumably you accept that the taxes you pay also contribute to hospitals, which you rarely use? As far as I'm concerned if one of my family is in need of urgent attention then I'm happy to pay a contribution to ensure that an ambulance turns up.
As for children, these are tomorrows wage earners and tax payers. Later on in life you will most likely benefit from them paying their taxes.
There is also the small issue of these people having to buy things to eat and survive, cars, other adornments, etc. This emerging generation are tomorrows customers for your business (and for some businesses are the actual customer).
PoP
-----
My published email address probably won't work. If you need to contact me please submit your comments via the web form at
And the Belgium taxpayers are paying for free commuting which benefits their environment, their health and their children's safety by having fewer cars on the roads.
MM
Of course I accept it! I am not the one arguing against free commuting in Belgium! I am all in favour of it here as well.
MM
More than £300
Sorry, I guess IMM has been at his tricks again. One of these days I must read his responses, but it's much more fun twit-filtering him and then trying to figure out what he's said when someone else responds ;)
PoP
-----
My published email address probably won't work. If you need to contact me please submit your comments via the web form at
What the hell are you on about?
How much more?
MM
NO! There is no such thing as good free public transport. Providing it at the expense of the majority taxpayers, simply distorts the market and enables an elite minority to continue with an unsustainable way of life. The number of cars on the road decreases by a negligible amount. The much vaunted London congestion charge only increased rush hour bus usage by 111 people per day( if I have done the sums correctly). If you wish to live in a socialist state, where everyone WILL use public transport, then take the honest solution and ban personal ownership of any means of transport (including bikes) and increase income tax to pay for it! Then try to get re-elected!
As a further comment, how many people become sick from say colds as a result of using public transport and what does this cost? It is reckoned that the infection rate on a transatlantic jumbo jet is close to 100%!
The problem is not public transport, but centralised employment! Public transport is an uneconomic patch applied to cover up the real problem.
In 1970, 90% of people in new towns worked locally. Today, it's less than
30% as a result of employment instability together with lack of housing mobility. Public transport has no hope of providing the transport routes required!Regards Capitol
My God such illogical clap-trap...
Public transport reduces pollution levels, which saves people's lungs.
What is being subsidised to the hilt is vehicles. If vehicle users paid the full amount for their usage and ramifications, fuel would be twice the amount. They do not pay the full cost of traffic police, health due to accidents and pollution, lost working days due to accidents etc.
Vehicles are clearly not in the free market, no more than public transport, but public transport saves lives.
Probably not. It also keep 100s of cars out of the centre reducing air and noise pollution and less accidents. Ken is right! Extend the congestion zone.
Even in extreme right wing regimes, they realise public transports is a necessity and subsidise it.
< snip drivel >I detect some sense...
Hear hear!
Its also worse than that, the real problem is that car being up till now ceap and convenient, and towns being expensive and dificult tpo park in, most major large volume ot latge o]bject stores now have to be placed on or near arterial roads, this increassing traffic levels enormously.
Instead of driving into town, parking by teh electrical shop, one drivbes miles into the nearest Curry=s, to find they haven't got what you want in stock, don't understand your questions, and in any case will have to arrange to have it delivered sometime next year.
I teh beginning, we had towns with roads going through them, As journeys increased in length, we built roads around them. This was the last sesnible idea road planners had.However since then we have ben not releiving traffic in towns, but banning it altogether , thus forcing intra town traffic, and most of the shops at which you need to load goods directly into the car, not to mention businesses, out along the places you are stil allowed to drive - the by passes. The net result is that we have reversed the trend of separating localised traffic from arterial traffic, and every major road near any major town is now blocked up by short haul traffic.
I would agree that public transport is a public health issue.
During my career, I have sometimes had jobs where I needed to use public transport (train into London, follwed by a tube trip), and some where I have to drive.
Every winter that I have had to use public transport to get to work, I have had 3 or 4 bad colds, and at least 2 days off work. Every year I had to drive, I had no colds at all.
If ever something infectious is released on the Underground, you can be sure most of London will catch it.
Mal
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.