On the other hand, I commute roughly weekly from Newcastle to Reading and back. I find it utterly contemptible that I live in a society that incentivizes me to do that by car!
How do you get around when you're in whichever place without a car - or is this a work thing, and in a hotel next door?
But you could have a small house, one child, one holiday a year and have two smaller motors, and save energy without really impacting your life in any way.
WTF has it to do with you how I/we spend our money?
In the context of this thread on cars, if you/we choose to spend our money on a large car that uses lots of energy to move, is environmentally damaging, takes up lots of space in public places, is dangerous for anyone not in such a large car, and is generally inappropriate and unnecessary in most situations, then it very much becomes other peoples business.
then it very much becomes other peoples business.
It really doesn't.
Swedish guy I worked with told me about driving as a youngster, like at 15 yo.
In Sweden they could drive a car on their own very young, as long as the suspension was fixed solid on the rear axle.
Made it hideously uncomfortable and highly dodgy to go anything more than a very very slow. On nice long flat straight roads a bit more speed was possible.
Another take on make things more dangerous to make people act safer, and vice versa.
It really doesn’t.
Why not?
VED in relation to a cars emissions seems flawed to me.
VED is just a revenue scheme for the government, and the money from it is in no way ear marked on any way for roads or transport in general.
All these proposals seem extremely regressive and will impact the poor disproportionally.
Strange as the ones calling for changes seem to be the ones who are normally trying to show they have a high level of empathy for those less well off 🙂
The problem with being woke is someone always gets the arse end of your idea. Soon people will be disappearing in a wokey paradox vortex 🙂
Why not?
I see the reasons you've given. However, you're welcome to have an opinion on what I drive - and that's all it is, an opinion. It's certainly not any of your business.
How do you get around when you’re in whichever place without a car – or is this a work thing, and in a hotel next door?
I drove the car up week 1 and leave it in the NCP.
If I was office-based I'd do as you suggested, but I work in TV production and don't really have a clue where I'll be needed within ~25miles of the city center and need the car/van to carry cameras and assorted kit arround.
I take it you’re not a business owner who HAS to drive tens of thousands of miles a year
Then you just pass on that cost to the customer. Every one of your competitors is in the same situation. And if they can figure out how to do the same work in a less polluting and cheaper way, then that's just capitalism.
I see the reasons you’ve given. However, you’re welcome to have an opinion on what I drive – and that’s all it is, an opinion. It’s certainly not any of your business.
Unfortunately, it is the rest of the world's problem, and the tax system should better reflect that.
Then you just pass on that cost to the customer.
You really think it's that easy? 🤣
I see the reasons you’ve given. However, you’re welcome to have an opinion on what I drive – and that’s all it is, an opinion. It’s certainly not any of your business.
When your choices start impacting other peoples environment, it also becomes their business.
It’s certainly not any of your business.
Aside from clearly it is. Lets just take the casual examples of carparks being placed under far greater pressure due to oversized cars or the example given of roads being blocked by people using them as personal parking spots with oversized vehicles or that peoples sightlines are blocked because someone else decides they need something bigger to help their own sightlines.
In the same way that if I ride like an idiot its other peoples business if I drive some oversized junk then it becomes their business.
You really think it’s that easy? 🤣
I mean, if it's harder for you than your competitors they could also source from then I think that just demonstrates how much of a subsidy to polluters the current system is.
I've said before that I find it daft that the current system actually pays me to pollute because I make a net profit on 45p/mile. But I have a conscience about it so I'm getting the train instead which costs more money than the diesel would if I wasn't passing it on and doesn't make me a profit. It costs me about £190 a week to do the right thing environmentally, that's bonkers!
Farm vehicles already have leeway, if you want to drive to tesco, buy a honda jazz.
As others are commenting, deliveries still need to happen. This massively increases rural costs. Even a Jazz will cost a lot if you do 12k a year just to get to supermarket and work each week, etc.
This massively increases rural costs.
So does having your crops fail.
It is muted that 'road usage' tax will be coming in the near future to compensate for the reduction in fuel tax revenue as Ev's become more common. Currently when you cross a tolled bridge for instance there are different rates for different sized vehicles, so I see no problem in implementing a proportional much higher rate for vehicles that take up more space and have a higher impact per single usage when this eventually comes in. Outsized personal vehicles need to be nudged off the road so that we all collectively do our bit to attempt to improve our excessive impact, exorbitant pricing will help to make this happen given our repeated failure to implement change on moral grounds alone. If an individual absolutely needs a big vehicle for business then there could be a way to offset the extra tax paid against the businesses yearly assessment so that small firms aren't unfairly penalised, there could also be exemptions for large scale transportation of essential goods such as food. If you need a huge vehicle for the two weeks a year you go on hollibobs then wouldn't it be better if there were decent rental options for these outlier events, dealers could even arrange that sort of thing as some sort of subscription service.
of course it does, the standing weight of a 2 tonne chelsea tractor with 20 inch rims and the aero of a small house will burn more fuel than a fiesta, especialy in stop-start traffic like the school run.
If you're only doing 30-50 miles per week - the delta in fuel is what? £12 a week? So over a year £500, but you really don't see that money as it dribbles out. A weight and efficiency based tax would be a huge disincentive and would make people really think about their choice and usage.
<1000kg = 0
1000-1250 = 100
1250-1500 = 300
1500-1750 = 500 *2 in the first 4 years
1750-2000 = 1000 *2 in the first 5 years
2000+ = 2000 *2 in the first 6 years
3l/100km or 8km/kwh = 0
4l/100km or 7km/kwh = 100
5l/100km or 6km/kwh = 200
6l/100km or 5km/kwh = 300
>7l/100km or <4km/kwh = 500
We'll soon see how many people "need" a massive car with difflocks, 4wd and the aerodynamics of a brick building whether it be an EV or DJ.
It’s certainly not any of your business.
Unfortunately, it is our business. I wish it weren't, but it is. Similarly, what I drive and consume is also everyone's business.
But it isn't mol - no more than its any of my business where you choose to go on holiday for example.
Everyone seems to think that other people's affairs are their business to get involved in these days
A weight and efficiency based tax would be a huge disincentive and would make people really think about their choice and usage.
I pay +£500pa already as my cost over £40k new - and I suspect do most folk driving these SUV's that many folk seem to hate (but not 'leisure' vans eh?).
But under an 'efficiency' rule that ought to reduce my VED pa, as my car does better than pretty much every petrol car.
Big car versus small car, its not pretty
Still stuggling to work out how they managed to flip it, Yaris didn’t seem to budge an inch!
Disco thought it was messing with an old-Lady's shopping car, but it's a GR Yaris, the Honey Badger of the automotive world.
TAFKASTR is right - it's not our business, and it shouldn't be, but I can (unfortunately) see a time coming when it will be. If people refuse to change their behaviour for societal good, then the very laws that you abhor for their restrictions on your choice and behavior, will come. They'll have to, otherwise there's no way out of this.
The pandemic proved that people will act in their own, provincial self interest unless (and sometimes irregardless of) laws are emplaced to protect others at your expense.
The exceptionalism shown during the pandemic was absolutely plain to see. "I don't have to follow the rules, because", "that rule doesn't apply to me, because", "I'm not doing that cos Dom Cum didn't follow the rules, so why should I?" These are the same exceptionalism used to justify lifestyle choice that have effects on others. Driving 2 miles to work because "there's no law against it", keeping the external floodlights of your house on all day and night, "because it looks nice". Driving a massive car because it make you feel like king dingaling and "you've got he money, so why not?".
Legitimate reasons for a big car? Fine. Legitimate reasons for foreign travel? Fine. Unfettered squandering of resources for no legitimate reason. NOT fine.
Everyone seems to think that other people’s affairs are their business to get involved in these days
Are you collecting the environmental impact of your driving in a container, then taking it home to clean it before releasing fresh air back outside? If no, then your car (and mine) are polluting the air others have to breath making it their business too
Everyone seems to think that other people’s affairs are their business to get involved in these days
It becomes other people's business when it affects them. For example if you were my neighbour I would not care one jot what music you listen to. But if you play it too loud at 2am then it becomes my business.
Everyone knows on here I drive a Discovery and that it's for work.
However to the man in the street, he may see a massive SUV just for my own personal gratification. Said man may question why I drive it.
I may choose to explain why, or I may choose to tell him it's none of his business.
At that point, it's stops being any of his business.
He can shuffle off and come to his own conclusions if he wants, but they may well be wrong
Legitimate reasons for a big car? Fine. Legitimate reasons for foreign travel? Fine
who rules on legitimacy? where on the scale of
Because I'm rich and I can > its a nice thing to do with my life > absolutely essential for me and my dependents to not die in the immediate future
does the cut off fall?
who rules on legitimacy? where on the scale of
Usually on here I think it's based on what the individual voicing their opinion does in their daily life and then they judge from that starting point
I'm sure there are some that have a small car due to circumstance, rather than a purely environmental decision, but they will use it to demonstrate how they are doing 'the right thing'
Similarly, I'd like to see the behaviour of EVERYONE on here who claims to be super eco friendly if they won the lottery.
I'm sure many WOULD live a conservative lifestyle, but if every single one claimed they wouldn't have any unnecessary extravagances, then there are some liars. Fact
ayjaydoubleyou
Free Memberwho rules on legitimacy? where on the scale of
Because I’m rich and I can > its a nice thing to do with my life > absolutely essential for me and my dependents to not die in the immediate future, does the cut off fall?
Ideally with the individual, but realistically with rules guided by committees and experts.
Similarly, I’d like to see the behaviour of EVERYONE on here who claims to be super eco friendly if they won the lottery.
I’m sure many WOULD live a conservative lifestyle, but if every single one claimed they wouldn’t have any unnecessary extravagances, then there are some liars. Fact
What's the carbon footprint of that straw man?
More to the point, what are the odds of it?
Odds of winning the lottery: 1 in 45 million
The number of forum regulars: a couple of hundred?
Odds of the winner being environmentally insensitive: ??
Odds of them lying about it beforehand: ??
Straw man?
I'm not arguing anything. I'm pointing out something that is more than likely true. Truth hurts does it?
*Edit for your edit.
Give over, you know full well it's a hypothetical scenario.
Just as I'm sure you know full well under certain circumstances, people who claim to be holier than thou would have double standards
I’m sure many WOULD live a conservative lifestyle, but if every single one claimed they wouldn’t have any unnecessary extravagances, then there are some liars.
I think you mis-understand. We're not trying to make out we're better. At least, I'm not. I'll freely admit where I waste carbon and resources, and I have admitted that in this thread. But this isn't about me vs you. The fact is that the things we all choose to do affect each other. So it is all our business. Anyone can criticise me for what I do, it's entirely valid.
I'm more playing devils advocate than me Vs anyone mol
I'm well past being judged on here 🤣🤣
I'll state a claim for the defence though when the STW massive set out the stall for what people should and shouldn't be allowed to do 😉
TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsSTR
Full MemberUsually on here I think it’s based on what the individual voicing their opinion does in their daily life and then they judge from that starting point
Maybe that's because some are doing more than others and it sucks when you're really struggling to make a difference and some don't even try?
I’m sure there are some that have a small car due to circumstance, rather than a purely environmental decision, but they will use it to demonstrate how they are doing ‘the right thing’
Maybe, but it's still the right thing to be shouting about in the current climate.
Similarly, I’d like to see the behaviour of EVERYONE on here who claims to be super eco friendly if they won the lottery.
Which is why rules may be required as people cant be trusted to do what's in everyone's best interest, not just their own. How many celebrities were caught red handed during the pandemic trying to fly into small airports on private jets in order to have a holiday while everyone else endured?
I’m sure many WOULD live a conservative lifestyle, but if every single one claimed they wouldn’t have any unnecessary extravagances, then there are some liars. Fact
No one should have to forgo everything, that's not right, but being unwilling to sacrifice anything especially at the expense of others is criminal and should be treated as such.
I’m more playing devils advocate than me Vs anyone mol
Fair.. and I know you (may!) have a use for a large 4x4. But it's an interesting topic: what society means and what it should mean. And it comes up on here a lot, indirectly.
Maybe, but it’s still the right thing to be shouting about in the current climate.
This is a good point. One of the biggest factors influencing behaviour is what people think others will think. So if enough people shout about these things the more behaviour will change.
I’m more playing devils advocate
I think that's colloquially referred to as trolling then.
Truth hurts does it?
I mean, if behaving better than a 1 in 45 million chance hypothetical argument helps you sleep at night .....
Much as I'm not trying to start an argument and I'm not trying to single you out here TAFKASTR - but this made me laugh:
TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsSTR
Full MemberUsually on here I think it’s based on what the individual voicing their opinion does in their daily life and then they judge from that starting point
I’m sure there are some that have a small car due to circumstance, rather than a purely environmental decision, but they will use it to demonstrate how they are doing ‘the right thing’
Preceded by this:
TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsSTR
Full MemberI have a small house, one child and have one holiday a year. Ok, I have a couple of big motors.
My point is about freedom of choice.
How much of the first two points were driven by environmental concerns or through an attempt to balance the latter?
Crikey. This took quite an unpleasent turn didnt it.
Back to the OQ.
Its tricky for me because i do in theorey think their should be. You see it outside nursery and school every day. Massive cars, in inappropriate situations, struggling to maneuver in spaces you could land a jumbo jet in. Jesticulating and effing and jeffing at each other because they want to drop wee Jimothy off AT the school gate, not 50m from it.
Having SAID that.
My only transport is a 6.5m Long, 2.4m wide, < 30mpg Van.
It does 2000 miles a year tops, and NEVER into town or school.
We ride our bikes everywhere. The van only really goes out on holiday, to pick up timber, or up country to see family 200miles away. (I havent tried Public transport with a 5 yr old and an 18month old and all their crap and my crap for 10 days away yet)
So can i not have my Van?
So can i not have my Van?
Some here would rather you didn't. While we are at it can we ban pets, foreign holidays, more than 2 children, and eating meat? It's the planet.
I’m not arguing anything. I’m pointing out something that is more than likely true. Truth hurts does it?
Truth?
Nobody has claimed to be paragons of virtue have they, I think I said my car is too big and inefficient. But I think some of us have simply accepted the need for changes and are happy to engage in discussion about what could be done, and what the practical implications might be, including some inevitable inequalities...
Railing against anyone who simply discusses changing from the current Status-Quo, labelling them as "Woke" (as if that's an insult) and unrealistic isn't really constructive is it? I assume you do this because you have a big throbber for cars?
But some people seem quite offended by the mere idea of fewer cars on the roads or making it more costly to run one. But TBH I can mostly see benefits; for society, for people's physical and mental health, for the environment and even for those who continue to own cars as there would be less traffic to contend with...
Of course just making car ownership/operation more expensive on it's own is pointless, you have to do beneficial things with any revenue derived. As it is we charge an amount of VED that is supposedly linked to the environmental damage the car does (but nowhere near proportionate) and just throw it in the general taxation pot to fund more roads/hospitals/Faulty PPE procurement from Goves mates, etc...
If you do end up squeezing more money out of a diminishing number of car owners, it has to be ring-fenced and put towards public transport, cycle and walking infrastructure and environmentally beneficial projects...
So can i not have my Van?
Do you need a van?
Do you need a van?
Only if the train isn't running from Warrington to Glasgow.
+1 for bigger cars being much better, at least for me
Far more comfy and can carry more stuff. I don’t need to drive round the city, so parking isn’t an issue. And whilst they may be more expensive to run and leave a slightly higher carbon footprint, I’ve offset that by buying second hand and only driving a few thousand miles a year. They are safer too, although that didn’t factor into the equation when I bought one
No way would I be driving something g like a fiesta or a Toyota aygo. Hateful little things
They are safer too
No, they're not.
And for me, bigger car = Passat sized, that's a reasonable big size. I don't think many people need more than a Passat or Mondeo estate, and there's not a lot of fuel economy penalty on those.
No, they’re not.
They are. Crash safety ratings are relative to size. A 5 star small car is not as safe as a 5 star big car.
https://www.iihs.org/topics/vehicle-size-and-weight
