Turn on thread page Beta

How did Britain become such an anti-car and anti-motorist society? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    Cyclists do pay tax for using the roads, it's called Council Tax and it's meant to cover a large portion of a local authority's budget for highways and roads. Road Tax is a supplement payable by heavy vehicles because they cause several orders of magnitude more damage to the roads than a bicycle and thus more repairs must be effected as a result of their use of it, but on it's own it comes nowhere near to covering the incredible actual costs for the road network - one of the most extensive in the world, I might add.

    Anyway, I don't see Britain as an anti-car society yet. Some 85% of all non-pedestrian journeys are carried out using cars. Train usage, even having risen exponentially for 20 years, still only stands at a few billion passenger journeys a year. Most new developments in towns are still centred around car access, just with extra facilities for public transport, cyclists and pedestrians. You won't see a new Milton Keynes any time soon, but especially outside of the big cities, additional development still focuses almost exclusively on the car and how heavy car usage will be facilitated.

    In any case, I think that Britain will become less inclined towards using cars in the near future simply because they are bloody expensive to run when there are now viable alternatives, and because now, most of the places that people in small towns wanted to go out of town for - like big shops, cinemas, etc. - have migrated into town centres since the 1980s making public transport far more viable as a means of getting to the places that were once the domain of the car. Planners were for a time enthralled by sprawling, suburban, car-based towns, but as the limitations of cars and urban design (you can only fit so many cars on the road, and they tend to make the place noisy, polluted, eroded and congested) became apparent they moved back to the idea of CBD-focused towns with good public transport links, and with that the public attitude is slowly moving back towards that more traditional idea.
    Road tax supposedly raises in excess off £30 billion a year from road tax and yet less than £10 billion is ploughed back into the upkeep of our roads. So where is the rest of that going?

    But working it out it is an awful lot more money.

    Cars aren't just the main factor destroying roads. How about ice and snow?

    Its funny that that much money is put into road tax and we couldn't even afford salt to grit the roads.


    Also another thing is where does the taxes on fuel go? I have seen no improvements in anything car related.

    As well as that when you have a young family you are hardly going to go on a bike in the rain and snow or in any weather saying that!

    The task of shopping would be impossible without cars, travelling also. Taking children to school.

    And if the truth is known if there was no car money being made here the economy would be dead here.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeeC)
    Electric cars still create indirect emission after manufacturing when you plug them in.
    They release no CO2
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    Seeing as how I am a non-driver I think it would be considerably hard for me to run a cyclist over.

    Relating back to the point that I am a non-driver, I am not bias. I simply observe what is happening, it would be slow not to see it.
    I stated people like you, just needed to point out your inability to read.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mockery)
    I stated people like you, just needed to point out your inability to read.
    Well no, not really. It proves your inability to understand logic.

    People 'like me' are also non-drivers.

    People who would be able to run people over because they drive cars are not like me.

    So, therefore I was correct. Don't try and win a debate by trying to demean me.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ghost)
    Please give us some sources for your claims.
    This.

    OP, what makes you say that? Back it up with something other than just rambling rhetoric.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    I don't see why the roads should accomodate cyclists more than they already do. Do cyclists pay road tax? No, and until they do I can't agree that they should get any more benefits on the road.
    There's no such thing as road tax, and if you are referring to vehicle excise duty, a push bike causes too little emissions to have to pay that, and it's just put into the pot of general taxation rather than reserved for stuff to do with roads.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    They release no CO2
    The energy they use partly comes from burning fossil fuels, which releases CO2. It doesn't make a lot of difference if they release it on the road or at the power station, they are still responsible for emissions so should be taxed etc etc.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    Well no, not really. It proves your inability to understand logic.

    People 'like me' are also non-drivers.

    People who would be able to run people over because they drive cars are not like me.

    So, therefore I was correct. Don't try and win a debate by trying to demean me.
    People like you in terms of personality and opinions darling xx
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by matt2k8)
    There's no such thing as road tax, and if you are referring to vehicle excise duty, a push bike causes too little emissions to have to pay that, and it's just put into the pot of general taxation rather than reserved for stuff to do with roads.
    We know that, but you can't use something without paying for it. And I'm sorry what someone else said about the council tax pays for the roads, that's not true at all.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I wish it were anti-car, too many of the pollutant-puffing buggers around.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    Road tax supposedly raises in excess off £30 billion a year from road tax and yet less than £10 billion is ploughed back into the upkeep of our roads. So where is the rest of that going?

    But working it out it is an awful lot more money.

    Cars aren't just the main factor destroying roads. How about ice and snow?

    Its funny that that much money is put into road tax and we couldn't even afford salt to grit the roads.

    Also another thing is where does the taxes on fuel go? I have seen no improvements in anything car related.
    Most taxes are not hypothecated (limited to be spent on certain issues) - the government doesn't just take road tax to pay for road maintenance, it takes road tax, throws it into one enormous budget and then spends a lower amount on the roads from that bigger pot. Hypothecated taxes work fine until you run up a deficit because, for example, the road network suddenly undergoes a huge disaster at which point you don't have extra money to call on because you've spent money from other taxes on other things. Road tax is more like a general transport tax anyway - because the government is also responsible for rail network management but can't tax the already seriously exploited rail commuter any more - they have to get the money from somewhere else. You think that motorists have problems? Try being a commuter in the Metropolitan London Area with a £5,000 season ticket every year, and that's only ever for one route, so god forbid your place of work changes.

    As well as that when you have a young family you are hardly going to go on a bike in the rain and snow or in any weather saying that!
    Which is why public transport exists. It's much safer to have 5 buses going around on a snowy, icy day than 200 cars.

    The task of shopping would be impossible without cars, travelling also. Taking children to school.
    Not really. All of those things can be easily done without cars - I do the first one regularly, the second one currently (I'm currently in the middle of nowhere in Ireland without a car, and it's worked out fine) and the third one formerly when in school. Easier? Perhaps, especially if you live out in the sticks, but far from impossible.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    That's a good question actually. :holmes:

    (Original post by Erich Hartmann)

    Wonder where it all went wrong?
    Interesting. I never saw it go wrong at all in the first place. :holmes:


    Maybe you should give us some background to your misguided thoughts.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeeC)
    The energy they use partly comes from burning fossil fuels, which releases CO2. It doesn't make a lot of difference if they release it on the road or at the power station, they are still responsible for emissions so should be taxed etc etc.
    Well your refering to the old ones right? Things have come on an awful lot as late.

    Also when these cars come out watch have much your taxes go up then, because without road users thats what's paying for loads in this country.

    Contrary to what people in this country if theres a person who 1.Doesn't use a car, 2. Doesn't drink alcohol and 3. Doesn't smoke, then they are no good to anyone, because they are hardly paying any money. Those 3 things are heavily taxed here, and without them our economical structure would collapse.

    It is jammed down our throats how bad they are so that they can tax them heavier.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mockery)
    People like you in terms of personality and opinions darling xx
    Well then in that case evidently it is your inability to state what you mean hun
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mockery)
    You don't like the cyclists do you?

    Bike tax would be a stupid idea, while we are at it why not tax pedestrians for using the pavements.

    Cyclists never expect higher advantages, they do however expect not to be purposefully run over by people like you who then falsly blame them for running a red light.
    Nearly every cyclist I know seems to think it's their god given right to ride on the path and not stop at junctions I dare you to stand in several spots in a town and count how many cyclists bother to abide by the highway code which they are meant to
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    We know that, but you can't use something without paying for it. And I'm sorry what someone else said about the council tax pays for the roads, that's not true at all.
    By your logic, cars can't use the roads either, as VED is paying for the emissions cars cause, not some sort of charge to use the roads. Everyone pays for the maintenance of public roads through taxation. Council tax pays for local roads, motorways/trunk roads are out of general taxation.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    Well then in that case evidently it is your inability to state what you mean hun
    It was your feeble-mindedness not to realise that if I ment people who don't have a car then my statement would have been redundant since you obviously can't go running over cyclists, however in terms of personality and opinions it fits snuggly

    Since you've shown the intellect of a four year old I'll make sure its crystal clear for you in the future <3
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    Well your refering to the old ones right? Things have come on an awful lot as late.

    Also when these cars come out watch have much your taxes go up then, because without road users thats what's paying for loads in this country.

    Contrary to what people in this country if theres a person who 1.Doesn't use a car, 2. Doesn't drink alcohol and 3. Doesn't smoke, then they are no good to anyone, because they are hardly paying any money. Those 3 things are heavily taxed here, and without them our economical structure would collapse.

    It is jammed down our throats how bad they are so that they can tax them heavier.
    All electric cars use electricity of some sort that is partly generated by burning fossil fuels, I don't know what you mean by old ones..?

    I'm sure the electric cars will be fully taxed eventually when everybody has one in 20 years (maybe, though it's more than enough time to gradually creep the back up anyway), so don't worry about your taxes going up more than usual. The country needs money, if the don't tax cars it will just be something else anyway. It's just an incentive for people to produce less emissions, that's all.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    Most taxes are not hypothecated (limited to be spent on certain issues) - the government doesn't just take road tax to pay for road maintenance, it takes road tax, throws it into one enormous budget and then spends a lower amount on the roads from that bigger pot. Hypothecated taxes work fine until you run up a deficit because, for example, the road network suddenly undergoes a huge disaster at which point you don't have extra money to call on because you've spent money from other taxes on other things. Road tax is more like a general transport tax anyway - because the government is also responsible for rail network management but can't tax the already seriously exploited rail commuter any more - they have to get the money from somewhere else. You think that motorists have problems? Try being a commuter in the Metropolitan London Area with a £5,000 season ticket every year, and that's only ever for one route, so god forbid your place of work changes.



    Which is why public transport exists. It's much safer to have 5 buses going around on a snowy, icy day than 200 cars.



    Not really. All of those things can be easily done without cars - I do the first one regularly, the second one currently (I'm currently in the middle of nowhere in Ireland without a car, and it's worked out fine) and the third one formerly when in school. Easier? Perhaps, especially if you live out in the sticks, but far from impossible.
    You can tell you live in the sticks, try living in the city, children are not safe walking down the road.

    As for the other things, you are coming out with ridiculous statements that don't make sense.

    Personal question do you wear brown cordaroy pants, if you can afford £5,000 for a one way rail ticket, which works out vertually £100 a week it suggests so.

    The reason why you are paying that is because it has all been privatised, making the share-holders more money. One of the 'great' consequences of our government selling us out.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theclash...)
    I don't see why the roads should accomodate cyclists more than they already do. Do cyclists pay road tax? No, and until they do I can't agree that they should get any more benefits on the road.
    Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) isn't directly spent on road repair, maintenance and infrastructure; all that is paid for from general taxation and local authority taxes. I do not own a car but I contribute my fair share to the pool used for road maintenance and I do not contribute damage or wear and tear to the roads and I produce no pollution. You could say that by travelling by bicycle everywhere that I'll have less chance of becoming obese and a burden on the NHS (saving more money)!

    The idea that 'motorists pay for the roads' is utter tosh. VED barely covers the budget of the Highways Agency which is only responsible for trunk routes, a tiny amount of mileage of UK roads compared to highways managed by local authorities. We all pay our share for the roads (quite rightly so, we all reap their economic benefits) and pay for road deaths/injuries, health problems associated with pollution in cities, traffic enforcement, etc etc.

    On cyclists:

    I work as a bus driver in the city with the highest proportion of cyclists in the UK and I see everyday how cyclists behave. On a daily basis I'll witness: cyclists pulling out of side roads in front of a bus without a glance, cyclists crossing side roads from a shared use pavement without looking, overtaking stationary vehicles without looking, cyclists simultaneously under- and overtaking a bus while pulling off, cycling down the wrong side of the road towards a bus, cycling with no lights with reduced visibility, cycling around a bus whilst it is manoeuvering around a difficult corner and much more.

    I do my best to anticipate their behaviour and benevolently keep them safe (too much paperwork and mess). I know how some behave and how frustrating it can be, it's an issue that needs addressing with better education and enforcement. The same can be said for the general car driving public though, I see ignorant and reckless stunts pulled by drivers who I'm sure think of themselves as good drivers...

    I hope you can see the bigger picture...

    To the OP:
    Why have we become 'anti-car' and 'anti-motoring'?

    The UK is a crowded island with an overburdened road infrastructure. Congestion is rife and the economic benefits of our roads are being stifled motorists using personal cars for unnecessary journeys. Nearly every city in the country comes to a standstill everyday for a few hours mostly because of our culture of personal car ownership. They present danger, noise and pollution to our cities and our personal car culture contributes hugely to our country's obesity epidemic.

    Also, considering peak oil and global warming, I believe oil and CO2 quotas will be best invested in public transport for the greater good.

    Often motorists aren't completely to blame, the government and private enterprise needs to invest in viable and convenient alternatives. Our roads, our environment and oil are economic resources which we need to safeguard for the greater good of society and not to be squandered for the convenience of personal car ownership. Our culture needs to change.

    PS. I understand there are some groups (ie. disabled, shift workers, rural communities) that have a higher need for personal car ownership and this needs to be carefully considered before and big changes.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: October 1, 2011
Poll
Should Banksy be put in prison?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.