| London ULEZ, who can afford it now 10:03 - Nov 25 with 35940 views | RangersDave |
Just announced that ULEZ in the smoke is going to get bigger, and expanded to cover all of London.
WTF?
Up here in Manchester it will happen soon, making average Joe and Josephine pay to take their car past the boundary, which extends to the border with the M6!
all in all, what a sh1t show. [Post edited 25 Nov 2022 10:23]
|  |
| |  |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 00:10 - Nov 29 with 3014 views | PunteR |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 22:39 - Nov 26 by NewBee |
"It's really for the safety of cyclists isn't it?"
Speed limits contribute to everyones safety - pedestrians, cyclists, scooter/moped riders, other car drivers and, of course, the (speeding) drivers thenselves. [Post edited 26 Nov 2022 22:52]
|
So make it 10 mph limit.
Obviously speed limits have to be in place,within reason. But ULEZ isn't about safety is it and these 20mph zones are not about saving the environment . Quite simply , the one thing they both have in common is that they generate money.
Also how is ULEZ actually helping the environment? I still drive my non compliant deisel car through the streets of London chugging out all its fumes, I just now pay for the privilege.
Do you honestly think that when everyone has switched cars to a newer less carbon monoxide emitting vehicle then they will take the ULEZ away?
They won't. The zones will widen, the regulations on vehicles will change and adapt to the later models and it will kind of beg the question why we pay road tax. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 23:35 - Aug 14 with 2764 views | izlingtonhoop |
On Saturday, I witnessed Aaron Ramsdale, in his hummer, turn left into Drayton Park from Benwell Road, after signing autographs, doing selfies etc.
Now, I know there's no way out that way.
As far as I can work it out this means one of two things.
1. Arsenal players have LTN permits...
Or
2. If you get paid £61k per week, you don't care much for 60 nika LTN fines.
[Post edited 14 Aug 2023 23:44]
|  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 00:42 - Aug 15 with 2649 views | bob566 |
Don't know about the UK but I believe you can fly anywhere in the world from European Union emission free. Its all so contradictive. Can't get into high Street so buy online. Those data centres aren't eco friendly |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 02:25 - Aug 15 with 2617 views | loftupper |
Honest question. If the basis of this is simply to generate tax money, what is the general consensus on why? Where is the money going? And is there as much anger about that?
Sorry, just asking 😁 | | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 08:28 - Aug 15 with 2379 views | nix |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 18:44 - Nov 25 by BlackCrowe |
Know so many people in greater London and home counties that used to drive into London for theatre, meals, shopping but have given it up...driving has been so penalised, it takes twice as long at least by public transport due to congestion charging, increased traffic from LTN schemes, cycle lanes etc. They still go maybe once a year as opposed to once every month or two.
God knows what that does to London's venues, restaurants, car parks, pubs, shops.
Kingston's the same... only really attract those that live in the immediate vicinity...it's days as a destination shopping centre for wider Surrey are long gone. I never really liked it much in it's heyday but now it's truly tatty. |
KIngston attracts loads of out of towners. It's just they now come to eat or drink rather than shop. It's nothing to do with driving, it's because people buy everything online now. In our house we have at least one package per day delivered. God knows what everyone is buying.
And London's venues are absolutely heaving. Last theatre trips I went to, total sell out, same with restaurants and bars. Hardly any walk ins.
Ules is obviously a money making scheme and I can see why people get fed up with that but we need money for public services. If people don't want to pay tax in one way then they have to tax them another. |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 09:02 - Aug 15 with 2317 views | essextaxiboy |
I would never dream of driving into central London , the tubes and buses are so much easier , but living out here in Essex I want to play golf at Hainault , Stapleford Abbots and Romford . I also visit my Mum who is 85 in Romford , take her shopping and the garden centre and suchlike .When the trains are out I drive to Newbury Park for the Rangers
All of those places are within the new zone, I have had to sell a reliable car and buy a cheap compliant one which as others have said stillmay not comply when he moves the goalposts yet again . |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 09:25 - Aug 15 with 2241 views | Watford_Ranger |
Given the scrappage scheme, plethora of compliant cars available online for next to nothing and the lower long term running costs of trading in a non-compliant car for a compliant one it feels a bit of a no-brainer to get rid if you’re one of the relatively few people affected and would be paying it regularly. Inconvenient maybe but then if you’re creating negative externalities for others it’s logical you’d be made to pay for that. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 09:25 - Aug 15 with 2241 views | StanFan |
It absolutely is a money-making scheme and one that allows virtue-signalling too. You can see why the politicians love it.
I could live with the money-making aspect but it's the changing rules that get me. I remember buying a diesel because it was deemed the more environmentally friendly. If I still had it I would be penalised.
On a side point. I find it very doubtful that it would be more enviromentally friendly to trade in my 7 year old petrol car for a brand new electric tank. But that's what we're being encouraged to do. |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 09:26 - Aug 15 with 2232 views | R_from_afar |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 00:42 - Aug 15 by bob566 |
Don't know about the UK but I believe you can fly anywhere in the world from European Union emission free. Its all so contradictive. Can't get into high Street so buy online. Those data centres aren't eco friendly |
Agreed Aviation generally, and certainly in the UK, gets away lightly when it comes to emissions. Flying produces vast amounts of CO2 plus CO2 emitted high in the atmosphere is much worse from a climate perspective than CO2 emitted at ground level. Some airlines compare their emissions with those of other forms of transport but it is not an apples with apples comparison. |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 10:10 - Aug 15 with 2120 views | actonman |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 20:28 - Nov 28 by TGRRRSSS |
Money making scam and nothing more.
If everyone stopped driving in the UK for 1 week what would they do without all the money they soak up via the cash grabbing cow it is?
That money has to come from somewhere. |
Yep , we all bought cars years back that were taxed based on their emissions… my road tax is £20 a year as it is eco diesel or some bollox so they have lost a fortune from tax from me but guess what ? It’s not ulez compliant now ! where as my sons car is older , tax is £135 and is ulez compliant ?
Fcuks that about ?
Give it 15 years and we’ll be paying battery tax or something along them lines |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 10:17 - Aug 15 with 2090 views | Sonofpugwash |
Traffic is now at the speed of the horse drawn carriage.
Expect to see these - shits out ball bearings or (left handed thread) steel nuts.
 |  |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 10:31 - Aug 15 with 2049 views | wombat |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 02:25 - Aug 15 by loftupper |
Honest question. If the basis of this is simply to generate tax money, what is the general consensus on why? Where is the money going? And is there as much anger about that?
Sorry, just asking 😁 |
its going on tlf as less people use the trains each day he needs to find cash from somewhere else i;e us car drivers |  |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 13:37 - Aug 15 with 1900 views | Sonofpugwash |
They're talking about imposing a toll to use the Blackwall Tunnel sometime soon. | |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 13:44 - Aug 15 with 1875 views | actonman |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 10:31 - Aug 15 by wombat |
its going on tlf as less people use the trains each day he needs to find cash from somewhere else i;e us car drivers |
I really want to use a train to go to Southampton on 26th but it looks like I will have to drive now
This country is so fking backward ! | | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:07 - Aug 15 with 1780 views | Sakura |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 09:25 - Aug 15 by StanFan |
It absolutely is a money-making scheme and one that allows virtue-signalling too. You can see why the politicians love it.
I could live with the money-making aspect but it's the changing rules that get me. I remember buying a diesel because it was deemed the more environmentally friendly. If I still had it I would be penalised.
On a side point. I find it very doubtful that it would be more enviromentally friendly to trade in my 7 year old petrol car for a brand new electric tank. But that's what we're being encouraged to do. |
It's more about control and power over lives, restricting choice than money making. Your intuition is right it doesn't help the environment. Creating a new car requires massive amounts of energy inputs. This includes the energy intensive process involved in mining and collecting all the rare Earth metals that create the car.
The problem that the virtue signallers overlook is that when your Tesla turns up they asses it as if zero CO2 has been produced
A conventional vehicle arrives in showroom having generated around 6 tonnes of CO2. Has a 400 mile range
An electric car with just a 125 mile range takes around 12 tonnes of CO2 to produce. So it needs to be driven 80,000 miles before it offsets the CO2 difference.
The most environmentally friendly thing would be to keep older cars on the road to reduce the need for the energy intensive process in making a car | | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:08 - Aug 15 with 1779 views | Sakura |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 11:06 - Nov 25 by Antti_Heinola |
Great news for local businesses! |
My local high street doesn't have a Reiss or a Zara. So I would just buy it online.
Less jobs for working class people in retail!! Yaaay... oh wait | | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:27 - Aug 15 with 1670 views | DavieQPR |
As electric cars become more popular, through enforcement, there is going to be billions lost in petrol tax. This could be a precursor to compensating for this. |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:33 - Aug 15 with 1616 views | BlackCrowe |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:07 - Aug 15 by Sakura |
It's more about control and power over lives, restricting choice than money making. Your intuition is right it doesn't help the environment. Creating a new car requires massive amounts of energy inputs. This includes the energy intensive process involved in mining and collecting all the rare Earth metals that create the car.
The problem that the virtue signallers overlook is that when your Tesla turns up they asses it as if zero CO2 has been produced
A conventional vehicle arrives in showroom having generated around 6 tonnes of CO2. Has a 400 mile range
An electric car with just a 125 mile range takes around 12 tonnes of CO2 to produce. So it needs to be driven 80,000 miles before it offsets the CO2 difference.
The most environmentally friendly thing would be to keep older cars on the road to reduce the need for the energy intensive process in making a car |
With batteries full of incredibly hazardous cobalt that is mined bare-handedly by children in the Congo - but as long as the West signals it's virtue, that doesn't matter it seems. The cobalt mines is one the great scandals of the modern day - makes Asian sweatshops look like great places to work by comparison. |  |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:33 - Aug 15 with 1612 views | CateLeBonR |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:12 - Aug 15 by Northernr |
I have wondered whatever happened to civil disobedience. Could happily have taken a bat to the bloody camera that snapped me coming back from Middlesbrough last season - 70mph on a two lane road in the middle of the countryside at 2am, won't somebody please think of the children. |
Being cynical it’s probably all part of the plan. The people can’t behave and follow simple instructions so we’ll need to implement more measures. Cameras for the cameras. |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:34 - Aug 15 with 1603 views | Hunterhoop |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:07 - Aug 15 by Sakura |
It's more about control and power over lives, restricting choice than money making. Your intuition is right it doesn't help the environment. Creating a new car requires massive amounts of energy inputs. This includes the energy intensive process involved in mining and collecting all the rare Earth metals that create the car.
The problem that the virtue signallers overlook is that when your Tesla turns up they asses it as if zero CO2 has been produced
A conventional vehicle arrives in showroom having generated around 6 tonnes of CO2. Has a 400 mile range
An electric car with just a 125 mile range takes around 12 tonnes of CO2 to produce. So it needs to be driven 80,000 miles before it offsets the CO2 difference.
The most environmentally friendly thing would be to keep older cars on the road to reduce the need for the energy intensive process in making a car |
Jesus Christ. Misinformation alert.
There have been multiple studies done and multiple articles debunking a lot of nonsense on this topic.
The full lifecycle of a petrol car vs EV of comparable sizes is as follows. Petrol car has lower emissions up to about 8,000 miles. Thereafter the full lifecycle of the EV is better (including manufacturing and shipment). Most EVs now have ranges of 250-300 miles, btw.
Obviously the best way to reduce emissions is simply to consume less (I.E. don’t change cares, don’t buy new things regularly, etc) but no govt or business promotes that because it would be sacrilegious to the Captialist Gods and impact GDP growth, which the world appears to have deemed the most important metric.
On ULEZ. I’m in favour simply because it has been proven to have a hugely positive impact on air quality, bringing London back to below legal limits. Awful air quality kills (slowly, over time) and impacts the living standards of many. The evidence is undeniable. Air quality improved exactly on line and in the areas when ULEZ took affect.
I know it’s hard for people to pay it, but as others have said, it’s a tax. You’ll pay it through other means if it wasn’t extended. |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 15:00 - Aug 15 with 1519 views | denhamhoop2 |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 02:25 - Aug 15 by loftupper |
Honest question. If the basis of this is simply to generate tax money, what is the general consensus on why? Where is the money going? And is there as much anger about that?
Sorry, just asking 😁 |
Well the ULEZ(In London anyway) is probably be used to help supplement the loss in earnings for TFL from less people actually commuting to work every day using their services. Just remember public money can always be used to help make private enterprise more profitable. The good old privatise profits and nationalise debts for businesses and infrastructure which sees weird mixes of our public transport system in this country | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
