|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
Kerr Mudd-John wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 19:11:16 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: [] You just got shat on, again. As always. You quoted all that just to add abuse. Sad. Poor little snowflake. Go for a ride on your pedal bike and have a good cry. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 1:55:29 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 13/07/2017 22:11, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 2:07:59 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 11/07/2017 17:14, wrote: On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 2:41:20 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 10/07/2017 22:23, TMS320 wrote: On 10/07/17 17:27, JNugent wrote: On 10/07/2017 08:21, TMS320 wrote: On 10/07/17 02:32, JNugent wrote: On 05/07/2017 16:35, wrote: On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 4:25:25 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: ...you get evidence of the existence of something that was alleged to have been extinct for 80+ years. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/05/local-roads-government-cash-councils-motorways QUOTE: English councils will be given access to a multibillion-pound fund for local road improvements under plans unveiled by the transport secretary, Chris Grayling. It was initially envisaged that the cash, held in the national roads fund, would be spent on the motorways and major A-roads managed by Highways England. But Grayling announced a change of tack, saying that some of it should be diverted to be spent on roads run by local authorities. ENDQUOTE The national WHAT? Someone needs to tell the Guardian PDQ that there is no "national roads fund" and that it was all abolished long ago. It was the road fund LICENCE that was replaced with VED. Obviously national and local governments have a road budget that comes from the general tax pot. The only reference I can find for national roads fund is in Zambia which I am fairly sure is not in the UK. No, no... nothing to do with Zambia... The story mentions the English national roads fund. And as you know (but cannot bring yourself to admit) and fund is not a budget. But you can imagine my surprise on reading it, because you and others have been squealing for years that the road fund was abolished back in the Middle Ages or something. It was abolished. This is a different one promised by George Osborne two years ago. http://www.ciht.org.uk/en/wra/news/i...nal-roads-fund "Unveiling his Budget this lunchtime Mr Osborne said that every penny raised through the duty would, by the end of the decade, be used to improve the highways network." Doesn't that demolish (once and for all) the futile attacks on Road Tax as a concept? Not really. The fund (if it comes about) will go to roads yet to be built, not existing ones. Where does it say that? Despite the announcement that has just been made, I am not aware of any new A-routes or motorways planned. Are you? ...end of decade, hmmm. Thirty months away. One hundred and twenty nine weeks. Plenty of time for a new regime to change its mind. It'll take that long to spend the money aleady committed. What the UK needs, though (and you hint at it above), is a couple of new long-disctance motorways which steer clear of existing urban areas, have only a limited number of interchanges and do not, in practice, cater for journeys of much less than a hundred miles. So long as it's not built in your back yard? Au contraire. I want one of the (few) junctions to be within a few miles of this very spot. How close to your property line would be acceptable to you? The closer, the better, You would be happy if your council bedsit overlooked a motorway? so a few miles is ideal. But take my word for it: motorways are built to bypass towns and villages, not to run through the centres of them. One day when you can afford a proper house you will understand. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 1:53:38 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 13/07/2017 19:02, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:54:36 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 12/07/2017 18:38, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 2:06:10 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 11/07/2017 18:14, wrote: On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 2:32:54 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 05/07/2017 16:35, wrote: On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 4:25:25 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: ...you get evidence of the existence of something that was alleged to have been extinct for 80+ years. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/05/local-roads-government-cash-councils-motorways QUOTE: English councils will be given access to a multibillion-pound fund for local road improvements under plans unveiled by the transport secretary, Chris Grayling. It was initially envisaged that the cash, held in the national roads fund, would be spent on the motorways and major A-roads managed by Highways England. But Grayling announced a change of tack, saying that some of it should be diverted to be spent on roads run by local authorities. ENDQUOTE The national WHAT? Someone needs to tell the Guardian PDQ that there is no "national roads fund" and that it was all abolished long ago. It was the road fund LICENCE that was replaced with VED. Obviously national and local governments have a road budget that comes from the general tax pot. The only reference I can find for national roads fund is in Zambia which I am fairly sure is not in the UK. No, no... nothing to do with Zambia... The story mentions the English national roads fund. And as you know (but cannot bring yourself to admit) a fund is not a budget. Then you should have no problem pointing to where I can find this 'National Road Fund' defined in some sort of official document. Wash your mouth out. The Guardian IS the *only* "official document" accepted by trendies like yourself, The last newspaper I remember buying was the first issue of The European back in the early 90's. Actually that's not true, I used to buy the Sunday Telegraph because of the Nonogram. That a cyclist doesn't like spending his own money comes as no surprise. I assume you buy every newspaper in the world every day. Not at all. But I have bought the odd one between the early 1990s and today. And always with my on money. I assume you have evidence that I do not use my own money to buy newspapers when I choose to do so. I am not interested in the news especially when the editor slants it to cater to the prejudices of the 'readers.' It is a defining characteristic of cyclists; other peoples' money and efforts are always the ones to use. Oh the hypocrisy. How much of the £10 billion spend of motorways is covered by the £6 billion collected in VED? It doesn't matter and no-one sensible has ever said it does. Road users are well in credit with the Exchequer as a result of the billions of pounds paid in other taxes paid in connection with road use. Do 'Road Users' include cyclists in your fairy tale world? shirley? Not me and those wrestling matches were fake. But you can imagine my surprise on reading it, because you and others have been squealing for years that the road fund was abolished back in the Middle Ages or something. Where? Here (of course). Har! Har! Har! and indeed Har!. Now cite the relevant post. Don't be (even more) daft. Asking someone to supply evidence to support their claim is daft in Nugent World? Are you seriously claiming never to have seen a post in which it was asserted that the road fund was abolished a long, long, time ago? |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 17:16:16 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Kerr Mudd-John wrote: On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 19:11:16 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: [] You just got shat on, again. As always. You quoted all that just to add abuse. Sad. Poor little snowflake. Go for a ride on your pedal bike and have a good cry. I smiled in the sun. But it's too good for the likes of you. -- Bah, and indeed, Humbug |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
Kerr Mudd-John wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 17:16:16 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: Kerr Mudd-John wrote: On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 19:11:16 +0100, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote: [] You just got shat on, again. As always. You quoted all that just to add abuse. Sad. Poor little snowflake. Go for a ride on your pedal bike and have a good cry. I smiled in the sun. But it's too good for the likes of you. Yes, I bet you cycle into the sun with a silly grin on your gormless face. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
On 14/07/2017 17:02, wrote:
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 1:53:38 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 13/07/2017 19:02, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:54:36 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 12/07/2017 18:38, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 2:06:10 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 11/07/2017 18:14, wrote: On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 2:32:54 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 05/07/2017 16:35, wrote: On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 4:25:25 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: ...you get evidence of the existence of something that was alleged to have been extinct for 80+ years. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/05/local-roads-government-cash-councils-motorways QUOTE: English councils will be given access to a multibillion-pound fund for local road improvements under plans unveiled by the transport secretary, Chris Grayling. It was initially envisaged that the cash, held in the national roads fund, would be spent on the motorways and major A-roads managed by Highways England. But Grayling announced a change of tack, saying that some of it should be diverted to be spent on roads run by local authorities. ENDQUOTE The national WHAT? Someone needs to tell the Guardian PDQ that there is no "national roads fund" and that it was all abolished long ago. It was the road fund LICENCE that was replaced with VED. Obviously national and local governments have a road budget that comes from the general tax pot. The only reference I can find for national roads fund is in Zambia which I am fairly sure is not in the UK. No, no... nothing to do with Zambia... The story mentions the English national roads fund. And as you know (but cannot bring yourself to admit) a fund is not a budget. Then you should have no problem pointing to where I can find this 'National Road Fund' defined in some sort of official document. Wash your mouth out. The Guardian IS the *only* "official document" accepted by trendies like yourself, The last newspaper I remember buying was the first issue of The European back in the early 90's. Actually that's not true, I used to buy the Sunday Telegraph because of the Nonogram. That a cyclist doesn't like spending his own money comes as no surprise. I assume you buy every newspaper in the world every day. Not at all. But I have bought the odd one between the early 1990s and today. And always with my on money. I am not interested in the news especially when the editor slants it to cater to the prejudices of the 'readers.' It is a defining characteristic of cyclists; other peoples' money and efforts are always the ones to use. Oh the hypocrisy. How much of the £10 billion spend of motorways is covered by the £6 billion collected in VED? It doesn't matter and no-one sensible has ever said it does. Road users are well in credit with the Exchequer as a result of the billions of pounds paid in other taxes paid in connection with road use. shirley? Not me and those wrestling matches were fake. But you can imagine my surprise on reading it, because you and others have been squealing for years that the road fund was abolished back in the Middle Ages or something. Where? Here (of course). Har! Har! Har! and indeed Har!. Now cite the relevant post. Don't be (even more) daft. Asking someone to supply evidence to support their claim is daft in Nugent World? Are you seriously claiming never to have seen a post in which it was asserted that the road fund was abolished a long, long, time ago? I am asking you to provide evidence that I have made such a claim. Your words: "But you can imagine my surprise on reading it, because you and others have been squealing for years that the road fund was abolished back in he Middle Ages or something." Yes... and? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
On 14/07/2017 17:56, wrote:
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 1:55:29 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 13/07/2017 22:11, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 2:07:59 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 11/07/2017 17:14, wrote: On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 2:41:20 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 10/07/2017 22:23, TMS320 wrote: On 10/07/17 17:27, JNugent wrote: On 10/07/2017 08:21, TMS320 wrote: On 10/07/17 02:32, JNugent wrote: On 05/07/2017 16:35, wrote: On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 4:25:25 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: ...you get evidence of the existence of something that was alleged to have been extinct for 80+ years. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/05/local-roads-government-cash-councils-motorways QUOTE: English councils will be given access to a multibillion-pound fund for local road improvements under plans unveiled by the transport secretary, Chris Grayling. It was initially envisaged that the cash, held in the national roads fund, would be spent on the motorways and major A-roads managed by Highways England. But Grayling announced a change of tack, saying that some of it should be diverted to be spent on roads run by local authorities. ENDQUOTE The national WHAT? Someone needs to tell the Guardian PDQ that there is no "national roads fund" and that it was all abolished long ago. It was the road fund LICENCE that was replaced with VED. Obviously national and local governments have a road budget that comes from the general tax pot. The only reference I can find for national roads fund is in Zambia which I am fairly sure is not in the UK. No, no... nothing to do with Zambia... The story mentions the English national roads fund. And as you know (but cannot bring yourself to admit) and fund is not a budget. But you can imagine my surprise on reading it, because you and others have been squealing for years that the road fund was abolished back in the Middle Ages or something. It was abolished. This is a different one promised by George Osborne two years ago. http://www.ciht.org.uk/en/wra/news/i...nal-roads-fund "Unveiling his Budget this lunchtime Mr Osborne said that every penny raised through the duty would, by the end of the decade, be used to improve the highways network." Doesn't that demolish (once and for all) the futile attacks on Road Tax as a concept? Not really. The fund (if it comes about) will go to roads yet to be built, not existing ones. Where does it say that? Despite the announcement that has just been made, I am not aware of any new A-routes or motorways planned. Are you? ...end of decade, hmmm. Thirty months away. One hundred and twenty nine weeks. Plenty of time for a new regime to change its mind. It'll take that long to spend the money aleady committed. What the UK needs, though (and you hint at it above), is a couple of new long-disctance motorways which steer clear of existing urban areas, have only a limited number of interchanges and do not, in practice, cater for journeys of much less than a hundred miles. So long as it's not built in your back yard? Au contraire. I want one of the (few) junctions to be within a few miles of this very spot. How close to your property line would be acceptable to you? The closer, the better, You would be happy if your council bedsit overlooked a motorway? so a few miles is ideal. But take my word for it: motorways are built to bypass towns and villages, not to run through the centres of them. One day when you can afford a proper house you will understand. Pathetic (that's you). What IS your point? What could it possibly be? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
On 14/07/2017 18:02, wrote:
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 1:53:38 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 13/07/2017 19:02, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 11:54:36 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 12/07/2017 18:38, wrote: On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 2:06:10 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 11/07/2017 18:14, wrote: On Monday, July 10, 2017 at 2:32:54 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: On 05/07/2017 16:35, wrote: On Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 4:25:25 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote: ...you get evidence of the existence of something that was alleged to have been extinct for 80+ years. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/05/local-roads-government-cash-councils-motorways QUOTE: English councils will be given access to a multibillion-pound fund for local road improvements under plans unveiled by the transport secretary, Chris Grayling. It was initially envisaged that the cash, held in the national roads fund, would be spent on the motorways and major A-roads managed by Highways England. But Grayling announced a change of tack, saying that some of it should be diverted to be spent on roads run by local authorities. ENDQUOTE The national WHAT? Someone needs to tell the Guardian PDQ that there is no "national roads fund" and that it was all abolished long ago. It was the road fund LICENCE that was replaced with VED. Obviously national and local governments have a road budget that comes from the general tax pot. The only reference I can find for national roads fund is in Zambia which I am fairly sure is not in the UK. No, no... nothing to do with Zambia... The story mentions the English national roads fund. And as you know (but cannot bring yourself to admit) a fund is not a budget. Then you should have no problem pointing to where I can find this 'National Road Fund' defined in some sort of official document. Wash your mouth out. The Guardian IS the *only* "official document" accepted by trendies like yourself, The last newspaper I remember buying was the first issue of The European back in the early 90's. Actually that's not true, I used to buy the Sunday Telegraph because of the Nonogram. That a cyclist doesn't like spending his own money comes as no surprise. I assume you buy every newspaper in the world every day. Not at all. But I have bought the odd one between the early 1990s and today. And always with my on money. I assume you have evidence that I do not use my own money to buy newspapers when I choose to do so. How can you possibly have used your own money to buy newspapers when you haven't bought one for about twenty-five years (though you're uncklear about the Sunday Telegraph)? Or have you already forgotten when you wrote in your previous post? I am not interested in the news especially when the editor slants it to cater to the prejudices of the 'readers.' It is a defining characteristic of cyclists; other peoples' money and efforts are always the ones to use. Oh the hypocrisy. How much of the £10 billion spend of motorways is covered by the £6 billion collected in VED? It doesn't matter and no-one sensible has ever said it does. Road users are well in credit with the Exchequer as a result of the billions of pounds paid in other taxes paid in connection with road use. Do 'Road Users' include cyclists in your fairy tale world? No more so than pedestrians (of which latter group I make no criticism). You may (or, possibly, may not) recall that we were discussing people other than cyclists (ie, we were discussing the ones who pay billions of taxes annually in various taxes and duties in addition to the usual incom tax, NI, VAT, etc). shirley? Not me and those wrestling matches were fake. But you can imagine my surprise on reading it, because you and others have been squealing for years that the road fund was abolished back in the Middle Ages or something. Where? Here (of course). Har! Har! Har! and indeed Har!. Now cite the relevant post. Don't be (even more) daft. Asking someone to supply evidence to support their claim is daft in Nugent World? Are you seriously claiming never to have seen a post in which it was asserted that the road fund was abolished a long, long, time ago? |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
It's not every day...
On Friday, July 14, 2017 at 8:25:05 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 14/07/2017 18:02, wrote: I assume you have evidence that I do not use my own money to buy newspapers when I choose to do so. How can you possibly have used your own money to buy newspapers when you haven't bought one for about twenty-five years (though you're uncklear about the Sunday Telegraph)? Or have you already forgotten when you wrote in your previous post? At the time (may 11 1990) I was working with Colin Pillinger at the Open University, we were at a seminar day at the Royal Society. £18Kpa seemed like a fortune after being a student. Do 'Road Users' include cyclists in your fairy tale world? No more so than pedestrians (of which latter group I make no criticism). So why do cyclists have to obey road rules if they are not road users? You may (or, possibly, may not) recall that we were discussing people other than cyclists (ie, we were discussing the ones who pay billions of taxes annually in various taxes and duties in addition to the usual incom tax, NI, VAT, etc). That would be the £6 billion motorists pay in VED, of which £10 billion is spent on motorways. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|