The Cost of Motoring...

[Globalti]

It's not just a question of the inconvenience of cycling; anybody who thinks they could persuade drivers to cycle is deluding themselves. Most people are so grossly unfit that they couldn't even swing a leg over a bike let alone balance and pedal. People nowadays travel prodigious distances compared to 100 years ago when there were shops and places of employment within walking or cycling distance.

Past governments are to blame for having encouraged drivers to buy diesel cars, thus exchanging the short-term CO2 problem for a much worse long-term NOx and particulate problem. A handful of scientists warned that this was folly at the time but were ignored. Now the government needs to allow diesel cars time to work their way out of the environment; VAG doesn't currently offer a petrol engine for the Passat and it will take time to reverse this disaster.

 

[Dan B]

I wrote to my MP (John Mann) last year about abolishing VED on cars & putting the equivalent onto fuel duty, that would mean the more miles you do the more you pay which seems a far fairer way to me. He sent it off to the Ministry of Transport who rejected it stating that people who lived in rural areas would be unfairly affected as they were reliant on their own transport, so it will be interesting to see if they are prepared to accept this which will the same effect.

Needs to be some combination of fuel duty and road pricing IMO, so that rural drivers get charged less and journeys in congested areas/at congested times are charged more. But I'd also like to bill directly on emissions not just on fuel, as we've seen from VWgate you can trade one off against the other

 

[Dan B]

@Drago I make no appologies for not being anti car.

I would have more issues with conatiner ships around the world or frivilous holidays jetting off to every end of the globe. If you are so concerned with air pollution and the use of natural rescources then focus your attention on shipping or aviation

It is possible to care about more than one thing at a time. Shipping is unlikely to be a major contributor to the pollution in Central London, for example.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Its a lifestyle choice to have kids, work fifty miles away,

Sorry but I disagree. Affordable transport at the moment is crucial to social mobility

Personal example:
I work in Manchester City Centre, but live in Warrington. At the moment my commute is a 30 minute walk to the train station, then a 20 minute train for £42.30 per week. But to do that I am walking 80km per week M-F. Not everybody can do that, the cycle is 8 minutes or so. But I find a 30 minute walk far less stressful.

Now, I am in a privileged position of being in control of my own shift patterns. For years, till I obtained this job with a decent salary I worked my way up doing shift work. In areas, and at times where there was no public transport. I've been able to work myself out of an area that has massive unemployment rates, purely by having the car. Without the car, you are stuck in the area you grow up. You can't just go and move to a different town/city without the money.

Even on my decent salary it would be very tight financially to live in Manchester, and result in not ever being ever able to build up a deposit, but I do occasionally need to work in the evenings after public transport ends. So should only the wealthy with upper class jobs be able to live near jobs?

I use public transport, as it's cheaper than driving to work, less stressful than driving to work, and faster than driving to work. 3 years ago, public transport was not an option due to operating times.

If the government wants to cut down car usage, they need to fix our public transport. A system that is affordable, and is suitable to modern working hours, and not end at 10 to 11pm.

 

[screenman]

It's waste for vanity that I find disgusting. Everything in todays society is throw away, even cars. I tend to own a car as long as it is viable.

That is your choice, and others should be allowed theirs. I question the 90% figure.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

I work in Sheffield & would happily drive to somewhere 3-5 miles from work. leave the car & cycle the remaining, but there is nowhere safe/secure to leave the car

 

[Jody]

VAG doesn't currently offer a petrol engine for the Passat and it will take time to reverse this disaster.

VWAG have always offered petrol engines in Passats. Although they currently only offer the 1.4TSi as a petrol option which is very limited.

It is possible to care about more than one thing at a time. Shipping is unlikely to be a major contributor to the pollution in Central London, for example.

Of course it is possible and I appreciate the point about air quality/pollution in central London. My point was about Dragos worry about overall pollution and use of the earths natural rescources.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

journeys in congested areas/at congested times are charged more.

Interesting side note about congestion charging. Manchester council have made noises about congestion charging for quite a while. Complaining about the levels of traffic in the city.

What they seem to forget is that all the car parks on the edge of the city, that many people (myself included) used and then walked into the centre, or got a bus/cycle. Have been closed, and sold off for £1000 PCM 1 bed apartments to be built on.

So the situation is that the genius' of Manchester Council can't figure out that closing car parks forces traffic into the centre.

 

[growingvegetables]

I'm all for lessening vehicle pollution but I have these concerns about raising the already expensive cost of motoring:

If levied on any commercially used vehicle the cost is usually passed on to consumers - so the wrong people end up paying.

It penalises those that need a car to live their normal life eg go to work and shop etc. Not everyone has access to buses, tube, trams etc. Not everyone can ride a bike to work over miles of hilly terrain.

My view would be that this is an education issue rather than simply applying more costs.

"Penalises"? Really? A trifle short-sighted, perhaps? Or positively head-in-the-sand myopic!

... people tend to expect to have one two, often three, and sometimes more, as an automatic right, along with parking spaces, their own stretch of open road etc etc. ...

That's just from looking out my window at the street.

Cheap car ownership and subsidised motoring costs have allowed people to develop all sorts of ... "silly" (?) lifestyles. Enormous commutes. School runs. Bizarre shopping habits (don't get me started on the 6-10 nearly empty white vans that visit the street daily to drop off a single parcel each! Remember the days when one red van came round, and dropped off ALL the parcels and letters in an orderly fashion?).

As motoring costs reduced, people factored in cheapness as they made myriad decisions about where to work/live, how many cars to own, and even shop. And it's unsustainable. Worked (sort of) for a while ... but that model is coming apart.

Ah well - people adapted to cheap motoring, and now they'll adapt to higher costs, as the real costs bite. No two ways about it. But that's not "penalising" . That's rational thinking.

 

[User482]

Sorry but I disagree. Affordable transport at the moment is crucial to social mobility

Personal example:
I work in Manchester City Centre, but live in Warrington. At the moment my commute is a 30 minute walk to the train station, then a 20 minute train for £42.30 per week. But to do that I am walking 80km per week M-F. Not everybody can do that, the cycle is 8 minutes or so. But I find a 30 minute walk far less stressful.

Now, I am in a privileged position of being in control of my own shift patterns. For years, till I obtained this job with a decent salary I worked my way up doing shift work. In areas, and at times where there was no public transport. I've been able to work myself out of an area that has massive unemployment rates, purely by having the car. Without the car, you are stuck in the area you grow up. You can't just go and move to a different town/city without the money.

Even on my decent salary it would be very tight financially to live in Manchester, and result in not ever being ever able to build up a deposit, but I do occasionally need to work in the evenings after public transport ends. So should only the wealthy with upper class jobs be able to live near jobs?

I use public transport, as it's cheaper than driving to work, less stressful than driving to work, and faster than driving to work. 3 years ago, public transport was not an option due to operating times.

If the government wants to cut down car usage, they need to fix our public transport. A system that is affordable, and is suitable to modern working hours, and not end at 10 to 11pm.

It seems to me that you're describing choices rather than needs.

 

[Vapin' Joe]

I wrote to my MP (John Mann) last year about abolishing VED on cars & putting the equivalent onto fuel duty, that would mean the more miles you do the more you pay which seems a far fairer way to me. He sent it off to the Ministry of Transport who rejected it stating that people who lived in rural areas would be unfairly affected as they were reliant on their own transport, so it will be interesting to see if they are prepared to accept this which will the same effect.

You've got that arse about face. High mileage drivers are mostly essential users and should not be penalised because they need their vehicles to work. It is the 3k a year or less drivers who should be hit hard by increasing VED substantially for the low mileage motorists. If 3k is all you do every year you don't need a car, taxis would work out cheaper and you wouldn't be the cause of most of the congestion that clogs up our streets. Anyone who doubts the last bit has only got to travel round any town or city during the school holidays to see how much better things are.

 

[PhilDawson8270]

It seems to me that you're describing choices rather than needs.

So you're saying those who happen to be born in a more economic town. Shouldn't have a chance in life to get themselves out of that situation?

I didn't choose to be born, and raised where I was. Neither did my parents. What I did choose though was to apply myself to improve the situation for whatever children I do have, and give them more to start with than I had, just like my parents did.

Without the car, there are no career opportunities. Unless of course stacking shelves, or pulling pints is the best that us working class are allowed to aspire to by your reasoning.

By your reasoning of "choices" my partner from her single mum zero hour factory worker. Shouldn't have been allowed to use a car to travel to complete here PhD and become a Doctor.

The "choices" to drive, are because it is the best solution to the problem. I don't drive because I cba, I walk 80km per week and use a train. I drove because it was the only option to get to areas in which there are serious employment opportunities.

 

[Jody]

That is your choice, and others should be allowed theirs. I question the 90% figure.

Think that is 90% of private new car aquisitions. Not many people walk into a dealership with 20k cash or bank transfer ready to go.

I don't begrudge people for what they do. As you say its their decision. But I don't agree with the industry pushing new vehicles at the rate they do and the high turn over cars.

 

[User482]

So you're saying those who happen to be born in a more economic town. Shouldn't have a chance in life to get themselves out of that situation?

I didn't choose to be born, and raised where I was. Neither did my parents. What I did choose though was to apply myself to improve the situation for whatever children I do have, and give them more to start with than I had, just like my parents did.

Without the car, there are no career opportunities. Unless of course stacking shelves, or pulling pints is the best that us working class are allowed to aspire to by your reasoning.

By your reasoning of "choices" my partner from her single mum zero hour factory worker. Shouldn't have been allowed to use a car to travel to complete here PhD and become a Doctor.

The "choices" to drive, are because it is the best solution to the problem. I don't drive because I cba, I walk 80km per week and use a train. I drove because it was the only option to get to areas in which there are serious employment opportunities.

Do give over. You could, if you wanted to, live closer to or in Manchester, in housing you could afford. You've chosen not to for perfectly understandable reasons, but that's what it is: a choice.

 

[growingvegetables]

Interesting side note about congestion charging. Manchester council have made noises about congestion charging for quite a while. Complaining about the levels of traffic in the city.

What they seem to forget is that all the car parks on the edge of the city, that many people (myself included) used and then walked into the centre, or got a bus/cycle. Have been closed, and sold off for £1000 PCM 1 bed apartments to be built on.

So the situation is that the genius' of Manchester Council can't figure out that closing car parks forces traffic into the centre.

Hate to suggest it - but reducing car-parking facilities is definitely on the agenda! "As cities across the world begin to prioritise walkable urban development and the type of city living that does not require a car for every trip, city officials are beginning to move away from blanket policies of providing abundant parking. Many are adjusting zoning rules that require certain minimum amounts of parking for specific types of development. Others are tweaking prices to discourage driving as a default when other options are available. Some are even actively preventing new parking spaces from being built."

Can't say I'm sorry; the sooner such an incredibly unproductive blight is severely rationed, the better.