Drivers lose 3 days a year stuck in traffic jams.

On May 26, 10:05*am, Simon Mason wrote:
Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

So you accept that congestion has negative consequences all round.
Yet you also accept that bus lanes are put in at least partly to
supposedly "deter" motoring, by removing roadspace from cars and so
causing, err, congestion. And you support that (ab)use of bus lanes.
So are you actually against congestion or not?

It seems to me that congestion is bad for motorists, cyclists,
pedestrians, the environment and the economy. Everyone, basically,
except car-haters. Yet we get councils trying to deliberately cause
congestion with measures such as unnecessary traffic lights and
removal of roadspace. Such mean-spirited, negative meddling cannot
possibly have the support of the majority of the public, even in
nutcase constituencies like Cambridge. I refuse to believe that
anywhere, Chapman-like "thinking" is anything like the norm.

I think the whole council system is fundamentally broken, as we far
too often get councils doing as they please and merrily working
against the public who they are supposed to be there to serve. Useful
services like rubbish collection are relentlessly scaled back while
parking enforcement is flagrantly abused to raise revenue which is
then misspent. Too many councils have gone rogue and become self-
serving, out-of-control, money-grabbing parasites. Accountability and
public control needs to be massively increased, and those council
employees who have no respect for, or wish to serve, the public need
to be shown the door. If that can't be done then perhaps we need to
get rid of councils altogether, and with the one or two useful things
which they still do, either privatise them or let central government
handle them.

"Something must be done" as they say. Until every last double yellow
line, CCTV camera and housing development is there purely because it's
in the public interest for it to be there, there is still work to be
done. Councils don't act as though they and the public are ultimately
one and the same, and they absolutely should.

On 27/05/2011 22:46, Nuxx Bar wrote:
On May 26, 10:05 am, Simon wrote:
Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

So you accept that congestion has negative consequences all round.
Yet you also accept that bus lanes are put in at least partly to
supposedly "deter" motoring, by removing roadspace from cars and so
causing, err, congestion. And you support that (ab)use of bus lanes.
So are you actually against congestion or not?

It seems to me that congestion is bad for motorists, cyclists,
pedestrians, the environment and the economy. Everyone, basically,
except car-haters. Yet we get councils trying to deliberately cause
congestion with measures such as unnecessary traffic lights and
removal of roadspace. Such mean-spirited, negative meddling cannot
possibly have the support of the majority of the public, even in
nutcase constituencies like Cambridge. I refuse to believe that
anywhere, Chapman-like "thinking" is anything like the norm.

I think the whole council system is fundamentally broken, as we far
too often get councils doing as they please and merrily working
against the public who they are supposed to be there to serve. Useful
services like rubbish collection are relentlessly scaled back while
parking enforcement is flagrantly abused to raise revenue which is
then misspent. Too many councils have gone rogue and become self-
serving, out-of-control, money-grabbing parasites. Accountability and
public control needs to be massively increased, and those council
employees who have no respect for, or wish to serve, the public need
to be shown the door. If that can't be done then perhaps we need to
get rid of councils altogether, and with the one or two useful things
which they still do, either privatise them or let central government
handle them.

"Something must be done" as they say. Until every last double yellow
line, CCTV camera and housing development is there purely because it's
in the public interest for it to be there, there is still work to be
done. Councils don't act as though they and the public are ultimately
one and the same, and they absolutely should.

Applause

Lots of it.

On May 26, 10:07*am, Judith wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011 02:05:42 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason
wrote:

Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

http://road.cc/content/news/36320-dr...ys-year-traffi...

And there was me thinking this was a cycling newsgroup.

Simple really.

Why, as a motorist, do you post here then?

A moment's thought should tell you that the congestion irritates
drivers, which makes them then break the law and which in turn makes
them a serious danger to cyclists. Any such danger and law-breaking is
fair comment on a cycling newsgroup.

Doug.

On May 26, 10:17*am, Abo wrote:
On 26/05/2011 10:05, Simon Mason wrote:

Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

http://road.cc/content/news/36320-dr...ys-year-traffi...

--
Simon Mason

Anyone who takes a car into somewhere like central London without good
reason is just mental IMHO, there are so many other transport options. I
used to do a lot of work there a few years back, travelling down from
the North East. If I was down for the day I used to fly. I'd drive down
if I was taking equipment with me though, especially as I'd often be
working over multiple sites across the city.

I tried couriering the equipment down but then you were relying on both
the courier getting it delivered when they said they would, and for the
people receiving it to not screw things up when it arrived. After it
went wrong twice I just decided to take it myself, in a bit of an 'oh
give it here' way.

Driving around London, especially as a non-local, was a bit of an
education! I was glad when the first Tom Tom came out for the old
iPaq... This was what, 7 or 8 years ago? I can only imagine things have
got worse.

You forget, cars are an addiction, which makes it an extremely
difficult habit to kick and that is why motorists choose to do silly
things when they don't have to.

-- .
World Carfree Network.
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

On 28/05/2011 07:23, Doug wrote:
On May 26, 10:07 am, wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011 02:05:42 -0700 (PDT), Simon
wrote:

Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

http://road.cc/content/news/36320-dr...ys-year-traffi...

And there was me thinking this was a cycling newsgroup.

Simple really.

Why, as a motorist, do you post here then?

Because you attracted him by cross posting off topic bollox.


A moment's thought should tell you that the congestion irritates
drivers, which makes them then break the law and which in turn makes
them a serious danger to cyclists. Any such danger and law-breaking is
fair comment on a cycling newsgroup.

A moment's thought should tell you that cyclists inadequate speed
irritates them, which makes them then break the law and which in turn
makes them a serious danger to pedestrians. Any such danger and
law-breaking is fair comment on a cycling newsgroup.


--
Dave - Cyclists VOR.

On May 28, 7:23*am, Doug wrote:
On May 26, 10:07*am, Judith wrote: On Thu, 26 May 2011 02:05:42 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason
wrote:

Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

http://road.cc/content/news/36320-dr...ys-year-traffi....

And there was me thinking this was a cycling newsgroup.

Simple really.

Why, as a motorist, do you post here then?

A moment's thought should tell you that the congestion irritates
drivers, which makes them then break the law and which in turn makes
them a serious danger to cyclists. Any such danger and law-breaking is
fair comment on a cycling newsgroup.

Doug.

Why do you post here, you are not a cyclist.

On 28/05/2011 07:28, Doug wrote:
On May 26, 10:17 am, wrote:
On 26/05/2011 10:05, Simon Mason wrote:

Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

http://road.cc/content/news/36320-dr...ys-year-traffi...

--
Simon Mason

Anyone who takes a car into somewhere like central London without good
reason is just mental IMHO, there are so many other transport options. I
used to do a lot of work there a few years back, travelling down from
the North East. If I was down for the day I used to fly. I'd drive down
if I was taking equipment with me though, especially as I'd often be
working over multiple sites across the city.

I tried couriering the equipment down but then you were relying on both
the courier getting it delivered when they said they would, and for the
people receiving it to not screw things up when it arrived. After it
went wrong twice I just decided to take it myself, in a bit of an 'oh
give it here' way.

Driving around London, especially as a non-local, was a bit of an
education! I was glad when the first Tom Tom came out for the old
iPaq... This was what, 7 or 8 years ago? I can only imagine things have
got worse.

You forget, cars are an addiction, which makes it an extremely
difficult habit to kick and that is why motorists choose to do silly
things when they don't have to.

-- .
World Carfree Network.
http://www.worldcarfree.net/
Help for your car-addicted friends in the U.K.

Funny that, he just explained why he had to use the car.

On May 27, 10:46*pm, Nuxx Bar wrote:
On May 26, 10:05*am, Simon Mason wrote:

Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

So you accept that congestion has negative consequences all round.
Yet you also accept that bus lanes are put in at least partly to
supposedly "deter" motoring, by removing roadspace from cars and so
causing, err, congestion. *And you support that (ab)use of bus lanes.
So are you actually against congestion or not?



I am against congestion, but it has been proven that simply pandering
to the motorist by covering more of the land with expensive tarmac and
associated infrastructure does not work. Deterrents do work though,
look at the massive uptake of cycling in London and the decline of car
use. In my own case, in 1996 I was fed up of sitting in traffic when
next to me was a cycle lane where cyclists were not affected, so I
joined them. Best thing I ever did and I have not been stuck in
congestion in my own city since.

Our local Council has invested millions in cycle lanes and cycle
routes which are well used and in these days of sky high (but still
too low) fuel prices gives people real money back in their pockets, by
providing a real alternative to the car. What is one man's so-called
"war against the motorist" is another's cycle friendly policy.

--
Simon Mason

On May 28, 8:05*am, wrote:

A moment's thought should tell you that cyclists inadequate speed
irritates them,

"Inadequate speed" will be the reason they always win intra city
commute challenges, while the contestant in the car shuffles along at
walking pace.

--
Simon Mason

On Fri, 27 May 2011 23:23:19 -0700 (PDT), Doug wrote:

On May 26, 10:07*am, Judith wrote:
On Thu, 26 May 2011 02:05:42 -0700 (PDT), Simon Mason
wrote:

Congestion costs the economy billions a year and wastes shedloads of
time. Plus drivers say that they jump red lights and exceed the speed
limit to try and get the wasted time back.

http://road.cc/content/news/36320-dr...ys-year-traffi...

And there was me thinking this was a cycling newsgroup.

Simple really.

Why, as a motorist, do you post here then?


Because I am a cyclist.