Congestion Charge

[John B]

JNugent wrote:

> "John B" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> || JNugent wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> |||| I know that some here believe that freedom comes only from the possession and use of an
> |||| infernal combustion engine but that simply is not true. It is quite possible to live a full
> |||| and free life without a car.
>
> ||| Only for certain values of "full" and "free". Apparently, you would feel happy to live largely
> ||| in the nineteenth century - or at least, that it the import of some of what you post.
>
> || Interesting. IMO living without a car results in an enhanced life style more in keeping with
> || the 21st century. Those who cannot accept alternatives are living largely in the 20th century.
>
> I'm glad you caveat that with the fact that it is only your opinion.

Yep, but I'm quite happy if it is your choice to live in the past.

<snip>

>
> || So long as the effects of their choice are not detrimental on others.
>
> All that is required is that my actions do not unreasonably impinge on the rights of others. And
> they don't.

In your opinion.

John B

 

[Paul Smith]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:43:29 -0000, "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> As far as taxes go, VAT is a good tax with a low cost of collection.

>VAT costs a fortune to collect. The government have just been very canny and passed the costs of
>collection on to the companies who are VAT registered.

The government was canny when it used VAT to force 1 million small business to keep proper records.
Records which they should keep by law anyway.

>Transferring the cost of collection from the tax authorities to the tax payers (as in VAT, Income &
>corporation tax self assessment etc.) is not reducing the cost of collection -- it is spreading the
>cost of collection into the accounts of others who the government do not have to declare when they
>spin their figures.

Self assessment can be a serious load. But the VAT takes me 10 minutes once a quarter if the records
are up to date.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:21:42 -0000, Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:

>> But now they have lost the beneficial serious accident trend as well it seems. I fully expected
>> it. The graphs on...

>> http://www.safespeed.org.uk/stats/graphs.html

>> ... do warn of the rate of change of trend. But it looks like the leap in graph 3.4 (etc) will be
>> much greater than expected. The 2002 point may well turn out to be 0% on the basis of the page
>> you referenced.

>A few posts ago you suggested, to me, that the graphs 3.1 to 3.8 were mistakes and would be
>removed. Now your are referring to them and particularly the extrapolation. So, the only mistake
>seems to be that they underestimate your supposed 'leap', not that their entire statistical basis
>was incorrect?

The graphs (red line) are certainly correct and useful. They do reveal some trends in the rate of
change. The black trend lines may be misleading and will disappear.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:29:56 -0000, Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:

>> >> >I'll tidy up this week sometime.
>> >>
>> >> I do hope that the statistics lecturer mirrors the graphs before you do that.
>> >
>> >They are already in powerpoint presentations.
>>
>> In that case my copyright is being infringed and I object. Please provide more detail so that I
>> may defend my rights.
>
>Really? You mean that by taking data from the DfT website, plotting it in the same manner as you
>have and applying the same extrapolations as you have, your copyright has been infringed?

Yes. Really. Please provide details.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:01:55 -0000, Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] says...
>> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:29:56 -0000, Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >I'll tidy up this week sometime.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I do hope that the statistics lecturer mirrors the graphs before you do that.
>> >> >
>> >> >They are already in powerpoint presentations.
>> >>
>> >> In that case my copyright is being infringed and I object. Please provide more detail so that
>> >> I may defend my rights.
>> >
>> >Really? You mean that by taking data from the DfT website, plotting it in the same manner as you
>> >have and applying the same extrapolations as you have, your copyright has been infringed?
>>
>> Yes. Really. Please provide details.
>
>Your copyright hasn't been infringed

Nevertheless, please provide details.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Colin Blackburn]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:29:56 -0000, Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >> >I'll tidy up this week sometime.
> >> >>
> >> >> I do hope that the statistics lecturer mirrors the graphs before you do that.
> >> >
> >> >They are already in powerpoint presentations.
> >>
> >> In that case my copyright is being infringed and I object. Please provide more detail so that I
> >> may defend my rights.
> >
> >Really? You mean that by taking data from the DfT website, plotting it in the same manner as you
> >have and applying the same extrapolations as you have, your copyright has been infringed?
>
> Yes. Really. Please provide details.

Your copyright hasn't been infringed unless you have somehow copyrighted the extrapolation provided
in Excel. Now go away and do your sums again and tell me where 0.945 comes from and what numerical
"sudden" change occurred in 1992 becausee I can't see either thing.

Colin

 

[Eddie Dubourg]

"Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> Your copyright hasn't been infringed unless you have somehow copyrighted the extrapolation
> provided in Excel.

IANAL, but academic institutions and staff are exempt from the most draconian aspects of copyright
anyway - there is a clause which allows for fair use in teaching environments - or at least, that's
what it says on our photocopiers (CLA and all that).

This assumes, obviously, that he has, of course, registered his copyright to the relevant articles.

E

 

[Eddie Dubourg]

"Eddie Dubourg" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> IANAL, but academic institutions and staff are exempt from the most draconian aspects of copyright
> anyway - there is a clause which allows for fair use in teaching environments - or at least,
> that's what it says on
our
> photocopiers (CLA and all that).

http://www.cla.ac.uk, and http://www.cla.co.uk/auths.html - there is a specification that the author
must be credited - I don't think that's much of a problem...

E

 

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:41:14 -0000, "Eddie Dubourg" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>> Your copyright hasn't been infringed unless you have somehow copyrighted the extrapolation
>> provided in Excel.

>IANAL, but academic institutions and staff are exempt from the most draconian aspects of copyright
>anyway - there is a clause which allows for fair use in teaching environments - or at least, that's
>what it says on our photocopiers (CLA and all that).

>This assumes, obviously, that he has, of course, registered his copyright to the relevant articles.

Ahh. An expert.

Perhaps you would like to tell me exactly where it says: "I have to register my copyright to the
relevant articles"
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Tim Woodall]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 10:46:24 +0000, Paul Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Self assessment can be a serious load. But the VAT takes me 10 minutes once a quarter if the
> records are up to date.

In a previous life I worked in an R&D division of a multi-billion company.

As part of the "D" we ran a small website (that made an enormous loss - paying scientists salaries
to maintain a small website is not the way to make money

Even the legal/tax experts of the company couldn't tell us where/how/who the 1000GBP/annum or so of
VAT should go. We opted to pay all the VAT to the British government on the grounds that at least we
were trying to adhere to the law. (There was a VAT audit shortly before I left and the reponse was
paraphrased as "Oh. OK" How diferent might it have been if that 1000GBP had been all of the VAT
rather than 0.01% or whatever of the total VAT paid by the company.

One of the tax experts of the company actually said, "The governments are watching to see what
business does. If it looks fair then the governments will make it legal."

If you are lucky enough to only sell to the UK (or maybe europe) with products charged for in the UK
and delivered from the UK then the tax situation is simple. But when the website(server) is in one
country, the banking occurs in another, the product is manufactured in a third, shipped from a
fourth and the customer lives in a fifth then the VAT situation is near enough impossible to get
right and the paperwork to track a 5GBP order costs more to ship back to a central point and collate
than the order was worth, let alone the VAT charged.

And then you have to make sure you don't accidently ship to "embargoed" nations although that is
another story and, AFAIAA, was never a problem for us although I understand that technically our
product did fall under several "technology" fields. (Something like the Tazers? theregister sells -
contain Tritium so they probably can't sell them to Iraq although quite what someone could do with a
few micrograms of Tritium is beyond me.)

Regards,

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.

http://tjw.hn.org/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/

 

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 12:54:16 +0000 (UTC), Tim Woodall <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Self assessment can be a serious load. But the VAT takes me 10 minutes once a quarter if the
>> records are up to date.

[snip]

>And then you have to make sure you don't accidently ship to "embargoed" nations although that is
>another story and, AFAIAA, was never a problem for us although I understand that technically our
>product did fall under several "technology" fields. (Something like the Tazers? theregister sells -
>contain Tritium so they probably can't sell them to Iraq although quite what someone could do with
>a few micrograms of Tritium is beyond me.)

Fascinating. I'm sorry to have prompted so much effort in discussing a subject that I don't suppose
anyone around here is really very interested in.

Obviously with any complex legislation there are some complete horror stories.

Please don't let's get bogged down in one of the most boring conversations known to man.

I'm very sorry I started it.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Marc]

Arthur Clune <[email protected]> wrote:

> You do however need a valid "Copyright Paul Smith 2003" or similar statement on the works.

No, you don't.

 

[Paul Smith]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 17:53:41 +0000, Paul Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> Try the extrapolation yourself. It's a very easy one. Tell me the results. The figures are
>>> available from:
>>>
>>> http://www.transtat.dft.gov.uk/tables/tsgb02/index.htm
>>>
>>> Calculate the 40 year trend in UK road fatalities per billion vehicle km from 1950 to 1990.
>>> (constant annual factor) then extrapolate from 1990 to 2001. Then calculate how many lives
>>> difference there is between 2001 figures and your projection.

>If you wait to wait a day or two I'll send you my spreadsheet and save you the trouble.

Now available at:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/fatality.html

Comments welcome as always.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 19:24:55 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman <[email protected]> wrote:

>> I'm not impressed by the "summary". And I agree with your comments about this country, but nibble
>> by tiny nibble our human rights are being eroded, and I'd like a much more rigourous statement of
>> rights to use as a weapon of defence. The EU is working on one. I'm not impressed with that
>> either.

>Since when was charging to use roads by car covered by 'human rights'? And since this legislation
>is designed to improve the quality of people who live in the area, what about their human rights to
>breath cleaner air and and enjoy less noise etc?

I wasn't referring to the congestion charge.
--
Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email Let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink driving

 

[Dave Plowman]

In article <[email protected]>,
Paul Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not impressed by the "summary". And I agree with your comments about this country, but
> nibble by tiny nibble our human rights are being eroded, and I'd like a much more rigourous
> statement of rights to use as a weapon of defence. The EU is working on one. I'm not impressed
> with that either.

Since when was charging to use roads by car covered by 'human rights'? And since this legislation is
designed to improve the quality of people who live in the area, what about their human rights to
breath cleaner air and and enjoy less noise etc?

--
*Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder *

Dave Plowman [email protected] London SW 12 RIP Acorn

 

[John Blake]

In message id <[email protected]> on Sun, 16 Feb 2003
21:50:43 -0000, JNugent wrote in uk.rec.cycling :

>"Gonzalez" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>|| How long do you think it'd take you to drive from Marble Arch to Tottenham Court Road in the
>|| Rush Hour?
>
>Are you counting Oxford Street as available?

If it is a legally available route.

 

[Petere]

Dave Plowman wrote in message <[email protected]>...
>
>Since when was charging to use roads by car covered by 'human rights'? And since this legislation
>is designed to improve the quality of people who live in the area, what about their human rights to
>breath cleaner air and and enjoy less noise etc?

"Improve the quality of people"?

Isn't that the sort of thing ****** used to be in favour of?

(I do know what you meant, btw)

--
http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "I hate cars. If I ever get any power again, I'd ban the lot." (Ken
Livingstone, June 1989)

 

[Dave Plowman]

In article <[email protected]>, PeterE <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Improve the quality of people"?

Well, it could be said that putting people in a good mood might make them better overall? ;-)

> Isn't that the sort of thing ****** used to be in favour of?

Ahh. Traditionally, that ends the thread - thank gawd.

> (I do know what you meant, btw)

--
*Can vegetarians eat animal crackers?

Dave Plowman [email protected] London SW 12 RIP Acorn

 

[Jnugent]

"John Blake" <[email protected]> wrote:

|| JNugent wrote in uk.rec.cycling :

||| "Gonzalez" <[email protected]> wrote:

||| [snip]

||||| How long do you think it'd take you to drive from Marble Arch to Tottenham Court Road in the
||||| Rush Hour?

||| Are you counting Oxford Street as available?

|| If it is a legally available route.

If it weren't, the race would be rigged against the car, wouldn't it?

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 21/01/03

 

[Ambrose Nankive]

Eddie Dubourg wrote:
> "Eddie Dubourg" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>> IANAL, but academic institutions and staff are exempt from the most draconian aspects of
>> copyright anyway - there is a clause which allows for fair use in teaching environments - or at
>> least, that's what it says on our photocopiers (CLA and all that).
>
> http://www.cla.ac.uk, and http://www.cla.co.uk/auths.html - there is a specification that the
> author must be credited - I don't think that's much of a problem...
>
IIRC the CLA only applies to the works of the publishers listed on the agreement. Covering most
academic work, but not Paul Smith's website. Which is almost certainly covered by fair use as
described above, although I'm not sure whether the person who mentioned that shouldn't be citing the
1988 copyright act.