There's a perfectly good path right next to the road ..

[Neil]

Are you being serious ? are you trying to say a car is more fuel efficient over a short 5 mile distance taking into account warm up of oil and lots of stopping and starting in traffic where the engine is running on more exhaust fumes from the car in front than a nice flow of air , than one that spends all day on a motorway ?

If that's directed at me - no - why would I say such a thing, or for that matter, where?

What I'm saying is that penalising driving be means of fuel tax, doesn't really affect people who only drive little journeys, locally, because largely they hardly use any fuel.

It's only really the drivers who have to go longer distances - who ironically don't really have other options - who get hit, really, by fuel tax.

I feel sorry for the professional drivers who don't have the option of not driving . It's the selfish people driving the needless short distances that should be taxed heaviest , many seem to forget driving is a privilege not a right .

I do agree - that sort of driving seems to be the type where most can be done to avoid it - walking, public transport. But I fail to see how it could easily be addressed.

People already driving fair distances probably don't have much in the way of other choices, or given the cost of fuel they'd be doing so.

They have taken something good and ruined it with
overuse

The swines... ;-)

 

[Neil]

i think he was saying over short distance you don't notice a higher increase in fuel cost (tax) than if you regularly travel larger distances. So someone who does 20-30 mile a week taking kids to school and shopping is not going to notice an extra 5p on petrol prices but someone doing 300mile a week will

Exxzzaactly.

Accrington Stanley? ;-)

 

[barry2017]

Don't worry about some stupid group of Jeremy Clarkson wannabes on Facebook. I can guarantee no-one who clicked "join" will have thought about it.

Really, what we need is a re-education of drivers. This is just going to happen, because more and more people will be forced to become cyclists. The price of owning a car is going to keep going up and up. Eventually, a car will be something only the rich will be able to afford.

Unfortunate for people that need one, but I can't see any other way, long term.

 

[pigman]

.....more and more people will be forced to become cyclists. The price of owning a car is going to keep going up and up. .....

sorta agree, but reckon it'll be the electric bike that will dominate

 

[Neil]

Don't worry about some stupid group of Jeremy Clarkson wannabes on Facebook. I can guarantee no-one who clicked "join" will have thought about it.

Really, what we need is a re-education of drivers. This is just going to happen, because more and more people will be forced to become cyclists. The price of owning a car is going to keep going up and up. Eventually, a car will be something only the rich will be able to afford.

Unfortunate for people that need one, but I can't see any other way, long term.

I respectfully disaagree, there.

After decades of the "always wanting more" mentality, I don't think there's any way in hell that the voting populace will tolerate being priced away from private car ownership.

It's one thing, when times were that simply few could afford, but to effectively take something away won't be tolerated - least not for the faux green agenda that's been used so far.

And ignoring my assertion of it being political suicide, they need the money, and they would like to try and ensure many major car firms don't fold.

It's always all about the money, they'd have a huge hole in their revenue if the motoring public was largely priced off the road.

 

[barry2017]

The thing is, how would the voting populace do anything? The government can reduce the tax on fuel, but the price of fuel is going to rise anyway.

There's going to be a lot of people having to face unpalatable truths in the future, because the way we live now is just not sustainable.

 

[Neil]

The thing is, how would the voting populace do anything? The government can reduce the tax on fuel, but the price of fuel is going to rise anyway.

I'd agree, that fuel will always be on the rise. Car manufacturers will (by necessity) have to look forward.

All I'm saying is that the populace won't simply tolerate being told, or taxed to the point where they can't afford something they've had years to be accustomed to, rely on, almost see as essential, then being made so expensive they can no longer do it - and by "it" I mean have personal mobility by means of a car (not necessarily, long-term, powered by an ICE).

In the short to medium term, the economy simply couldn't tolerate (nor would taxpayers, in having to find an alternative source) the revenue from fuel taxation, and VED to significantly be reduced by numbers.

And we've already seen, that car manufacturers drying up, is not an ideal thing in terms of our economy and workforce employment.

I just don't buy the words of doom, that come the revolution we'll all be forced to move around differently - maybe in the long term, things will evolve, but in the short to medium term, as an economy we couldn't afford or tolerate it to, and as policy, any party (I believe) has too much regard for self-preservation to do such a thing.

There's going to be a lot of people having to face unpalatable truths in the future, because the way we live now is just not sustainable.

I've no argument that in the long term, some things will need to change. But people won't just tolerate being told they can't have personal mobility, any more, nor can our economy do without the revenue stream that has been predicated so long on the "green" issue.

To my mind, long-term, that may be their undoing - you can't levy taxation so heavily, for so long, pitched at just the level to extract the most, whilst doing no more than loosely controlling usage, and then say - "You've got to stop".

Taxpayers, quite rightly, will seriously question, what happened to all the taxes you took, based on the "green" thing.

 

[Analog Kid]

In general, cycle paths are fine for tootling along on a jolly, but for a commute on a fast road bike they are ridiculous and dangerous. Many more junctions, paths that fall up and down for driveways, obstacles such as lampposts, grannies and dog poo at 30mph are not a good idea either. Quite often come to a sudden end and push you into traffic too.

Isn't there a speed limit along them too if they are part of a footpath, something like 12mph?

No, i'm not a roadie.

Your post reminded me of This BBC News article from a few years back, some crazy examples of "Cyclepaths" in there! Just clicked the link to the Warrington group and there's a book available too

There aren't any Cyclepaths for miles around where I live so I'm forced to ride on the road although my short daily commute only encounters traffic for a very brief stretch before I'm back into residential side streets. I've only had one run-in with an over-aggressive driver and try to stay out of peoples way as far as I can.

 

[reanimation]

^ WYS

I don't like using em, specially as I don't hang about on my Alu bone shaker , its usually wet greasy, muddy, and then theres pedestrians all over it and cars parked all over.

I'm seriously getting worryingly annoyed by it all. Waste of money to produce off camber pavements littered with people and cars, just like a pavement then.

Has some agressive raged scrapes recently on my commute back from Manchester city centre. Gonna try keep cool but its not easy.

So what can we do about councils wasting money on this ill designed/built dangerous crap?

And we've leaned that even snow wont keep dicks off their pointless car journeys. :roll: :?

(PS I actually really like cars, just not driving crap roads with nuggets)

 

[CAS]

In general, cycle paths are fine for tootling along on a jolly, but for a commute on a fast road bike they are ridiculous and dangerous. Many more junctions, paths that fall up and down for driveways, obstacles such as lampposts, grannies and dog poo at 30mph are not a good idea either. Quite often come to a sudden end and push you into traffic too.

Isn't there a speed limit along them too if they are part of a footpath, something like 12mph?

No, i'm not a roadie.

I entirely agree with this - interestingly in Holland the cycle lanes are continuous and cyclists have priority. I get very frustrated that cycle lanes in the UK take the same line as pavements and make cyclists stop at all driveways and junctions.

At New Year we were in Nieuwpoort in Belgium and it snowed - I was fascinated to see a mini snow plough being deployed to clear the cyclepaths. contrast that with Hereford this week!