Move to change law

[Mark Thompson]

> It's just as sensible as the nonsense of attributing every UK road
> death to "motorists".

I presume they were thinking about motor *vehicles*.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=AEi=A9ardo?=]

Brimstone wrote:
> Clive Coleman. wrote:
>> In message <[email protected]>, Brimstone
>> <[email protected]> writes
>>> In which case your previous assertion is either the result of a
>>> faulty memory or you're telling porkies because when I road on two
>>> wheels (motorised and pedal) I was constantle being crowded by car
>>> drivers.
>> Where I worked (shifts 6am, 2pm and 10pm) there was very little
>> traffic indeed the entire town is smaller that Southmead estate in
>> Bristol.
>
> The size of the town is irrelevant, the standard of driving is and Bristol
> is one of the worst places its ever been my misfortune to drive in and near.
>
>
Can't disagree with that and it's even worse if it's raining, even if
the rain has only got as far as Bridgwater!

--
Moving things in still pictures!

 

[Clive Coleman.]

In message <[email protected]>, Brimstone
<[email protected]> writes
>Literally only food, or other normal domestic and personal items (e,g light
>bulbs, clothing, etc) as well?
The house was my property, it was only fitting and right that I paid for
it's upkeep, maintenance etc.
--
Clive.

 

[Clive Coleman.]

In message <[email protected]>, Jeff York
<[email protected]> writes
>You mean that she never bought *anything* that had VAT on it???
I don't know, it would depend on how much tax is on food. You'll know
better than me, I'm sure you'll have your finger on the pulse so to
speak.
--
Clive.

 

[Steve]

In article <[email protected]>, Matt B says...
> Clive Coleman. wrote:
> > In message <[email protected]>, Matt B
> > <[email protected]> writes
> >> She never paid NI?
> >> She never bought alcohol or tobacco?
> >> She never bought anything which attracted VAT?
> > Not in the last 30 years.
>
> So she /has/ paid tax - albeit over 30 years ago. That qualifies then.
>
> >>> Next wild assumption?
> >>
> >> Everything I say is well considered.
> > Albeit wrong.
>
> When? :-O
>
>
You /might/ not be wrong in this instance but you (and the idiot you are
arguing with) are getting absolutely nowhere in a constructive sense.
Why do you bother?

 

[Clive Coleman.]

In message <[email protected]>, Brimstone
<[email protected]> writes
>The size of the town is irrelevant, the standard of driving is and Bristol
>is one of the worst places its ever been my misfortune to drive in and near.
Then it's lucky for me that I live and worked over 300 miles from there.
--
Clive.

 

[Steve]

In article <[email protected]>,
spindrift says...

> Back in kill file.

If only you would, then we'd all have a rest!

 

[Steve]

In article <[email protected]>, Nigel Cliffe
says...

> So having established that a flat fee, payable to the government and
> government agencies to do something, is quite common in the UK can we stop
> this stupid bit of the thread ?

Come on, Nigel - be sensible. This is MattB you're talking to! Have
you ever known him let common sense get in the way of an argument (good
or otherwise)?

 

[Clive Coleman.]

In message <[email protected]>, Nigel Cliffe
<[email protected]> writes
>Primary source appears to be this test:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASHO_Road_Test
>
>And much more depth from the book referenced at the bottom of the article,
>which quotes the UK TRRL. ( The Google copy only displays a couple of pages
>from each chapter, so without a trip to a library, full details will have to
>remain guess work ).
>
Basically it makes an oblique reference to axle weights but makes no
mention of tread area. It is a fact that pressure on the road is
directly the same as the pressure in the tyre indicating that it is the
load per area that is contributing to the cause of road wear and this is
relevant. It could be that cycles cause more damage than cars.
--
Clive.

 

[Steve]

In article <[email protected]>, Matt B says...
language and blatant misinformation as "engaging him".
>
> Sheesh.
>
Exactly my thought about the vast majority of your posts! Sometimes
(just sometimes) there's a glimmer of sense in what you write but then
you go and undermine all your credibility with your pedantic arguing
about how many angels can dance on the point of a needle. Can't you
find anything better to do with your life?

 

[Steve]

In article <[email protected]>, Clive Coleman.
says...
> In message <[email protected]>, Jeff York
> <[email protected]> writes
> >You mean that she never bought *anything* that had VAT on it???
> I don't know, it would depend on how much tax is on food. You'll know
> better than me, I'm sure you'll have your finger on the pulse so to
> speak.
>
So, to summarise, you don't know whether you're talking bollocks or
sense? I suggest the former, most of the time.

 

[Clive Coleman.]

In message <[email protected]>, Brimstone
<[email protected]> writes
>However, there would also be a substantial decline in costs directly and
>indirectly caused by the present overuse of cars.
How?
--
Clive.

 

[Clive Coleman.]

In message <[email protected]>, Dave Larrington
<[email protected]> writes
>Indeed, but I can call my **** a bloater until the cows come home and that
>will /still/ not magically turn it into a smoked herring.
Be careful what you wish for ;-)
--
Clive.

 

[Clive.]

In message <[email protected]>, Steve
<[email protected]> writes
>So, to summarise, you don't know whether you're talking bollocks or
>sense? I suggest the former, most of the time.
Who am I, to test one of the greatest minds of our time?
--
Clive.

 

[Tony Dragon]

Clive Coleman. wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>, Matt B
> <[email protected]> writes
>> Funded from the pot of money collected from taxes - income tax,
>> national insurance, VAT, alcohol duty, fuel duty, tobacco duty, VED,
>> and all the others.
> I can honestly say my mother paid none of these, even her TV licence
> was (is) provided for free.
Lets get this right, she lived in your house & you paid all the bills for
utilities, services, TV licence, all repairs etc. You bought all her
clothes, medications that were not prescribed, all her food, transport
costs,even the bunch of flowers that are in the vase on the table. She does
not pay phone bills etc. She has never done any of these things in her life,
even before you were born. On top of this she has never had a job or earned
anything in her whole life.

Please respond honestly.


--
Tony the Dragon

 

[Steve]

In article <[email protected]>, Clive. says...
>
> Who am I, to test one of the greatest minds of our time?
>

So how are the rest of humanity to know which of your posts to
disregard? Should it be all of them?

 

[Martin Dann]

Clive Coleman. wrote:

> Basically it makes an oblique reference to axle weights but makes no
> mention of tread area.

> It is a fact that pressure on the road is
> directly the same as the pressure in the tyre

No it is not a fact.

> indicating that it is the
> load per area that is contributing to the cause of road wear and this is
> relevant.

It is not only the pressure, but how much the weight of the axle/vehicle
flexes the road. Bridges are especially vulnerable, just look at the
long term proposals to limit the weight of lorries on the forth road
bridge, and the weight restrictions on the old Severn bridge.

I suspect that there could also be a factor in the speed of a vehicle.

> It could be that cycles cause more damage than cars.

I very much doubt that.

Martin.

 

[John Wright]

®i©ardo wrote:
> Al C-F wrote:
>> Paul Boyd wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> Anyway, half the time it's not possible to cycle on the pavement
>>>> because some berk has parked their car there...
>>>
>>> An illegal act that is also never enforced.
>>>
>>
>> Officially, maybe. There's a line of cars parked on the pavement on
>> my way to school, whose drivers have to realign their mirrors every
>> day that it's my turn to do the school run.
>>
>> It's a start.
>
> I was standing on a street corner (don't ask!) in the dreaded
> Weston-super-Mare some years ago (opposite the Playhouse for those that
> know it) and a Police constable was standing a few yards away. A car
> drove straight on to the pavement and parked between us and the shops.
> Mr Plod didn't bat an eyelid and went to walk off. I called out to him
> about said driver breaking the law and, with a gritting of teeth, he
> actually did something about it.
>
> There is hope, I thought, but these days they don't seem to come out
> when it's light.

I was standing on a street corner in the dreaded Leicester some years
ago when a cyclist decided to ride round the outside of a roundabout
taking no notice of the fact that s/he was entering a stream of moving
traffic. One bang later, there was a cyclist on the ground, with some
mangled wreckage that used to be a bicycle near by.

There were two Plod walking in front of me, as soon as it happened they
whipped round and said "did you see that?". I said "no, as soon as I saw
that I knew there was going to be an accident". "You're f***king useless
you are" they said to me...

John Wright

 

[Clive.]

In message <[email protected]>, Tony Dragon
<[email protected]> writes
>Lets get this right, she lived in your house & you paid all the bills for
>utilities, services, TV licence, all repairs etc. You bought all her
>clothes, medications that were not prescribed, all her food, transport
>costs,even the bunch of flowers that are in the vase on the table. She does
>not pay phone bills etc.
She did work a long time ago, but whilst the house was mine I paid the
bills. In her later years TV licence is free (over 75) and the council
tax was not required because of her level of income (Bills marked
£0:00). Like a lot of old people, she only ever went out when one of my
siblings took her. If you want to go back 30+ years then it's possible
she paid tax, but whether any of this was kept to be used for funding
the "modern?" Road system is questionable.
--
Clive.

 

[Nigel Cliffe]

Clive Coleman. wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>, Nigel Cliffe
> <[email protected]> writes
>> Primary source appears to be this test:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASHO_Road_Test
>>
>> And much more depth from the book referenced at the bottom of the
>> article, which quotes the UK TRRL. ( The Google copy only displays a
>> couple of pages from each chapter, so without a trip to a library,
>> full details will have to remain guess work ).
>>
> Basically it makes an oblique reference to axle weights but makes no
> mention of tread area. It is a fact that pressure on the road is
> directly the same as the pressure in the tyre indicating that it is
> the load per area that is contributing to the cause of road wear and
> this is relevant. It could be that cycles cause more damage than
> cars.

I think I see your problem. You assume a road is a solid object.
If you model a road as a flexible object you might get nearer.


- Nigel


--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/