Do not invest in any property before having it properly inspected. A seller may offer to have the inspection done, but he may use someone who is biased. You want an unbiased report from a professional you can trust.
A blog for real estate agent and anyone who has interest in real estate or property management business.
Buy a best property in india - 1 bhk, 2 bhk, 3 bhk flats in india.
30 days free of our groundbreaking service that delivers instant contact with active home buyers supplying their information directly to your smartphone. You can visit their website and video at eBroker360.com.
Due to its connectivity, shopping & entertainment, education and great value real estate, Goregaon is fast blossoming into one of Mumbai's most coveted real estate destinations.
We offer developer sales, sub sale, resale and rental of properties.
Decorating and diy projects to make your home a better place to live. furniture design, house tours,room design ideas, decorating tutorials and a lot of other cool stuff is covered.
A high class apartments for sale or rent in Monaco at amazing price of €24000000. 4 rooms set apartment with 382 sqm living area. This luxury building is situated in Jardin Exotique. Buy now.
MahaRERA is the act which allows buyers to monitor the progress of the projects to ensure transparency. Here are some most important benefits of RERA act that can be useful for NRI's.


"Table Trac presents us with a unique set of technology tools that will help us not only increase revenues and operational efficiencies, but will also position us as a technology leader for the future. The state-of-the-art technology behind the CasinoTrac™ management system will provide us with more casino data than we have ever had before while at the same time provide us with greater functionality and most important, new and proven ways of increasing player excitement." said Dennis Fitzpatrick, CEO of Siyeh Corporation, operator of Glacier Peaks and the development and management arm of the Blackfeet Nation.
Table Trac will provide Glacier Peaks Casino with an extensive suite of casino management applications and products, including slot accounting, patron management and player tracking, as well as PromoTrac™ and KioskTrac™ Table Trac's marketing and promotional solutions designed to assist casinos in driving player revenues.
"Ours is a reliable, flexible and most important, scalable solution designed around future growth and helping casino operators drive revenues through innovative marketing tools. We are excited to be working with the Glacier Peaks Casino, western Montana's premier gaming destination." added Chad Hoehne, President and CEO of Table Trac.
Located at the foothills of the Rocky Mountains in Northwestern Montana, The Glacier Peaks Casino is an enterprise of the Blackfeet Nation, the largest Tribe in Montana.
Check ACG's list of all Montana casinos.


Searching for, finding and moving to your new house can be a long process, but we're here to help! Our team of property experts knows it can be difficult to find the perfect property, so we regularly write moving home guides to help make your move easier.
Read on for a roundup of our top 4 must-have guides to help you with moving house. Learn how to calculate your budget, get the most out of a viewing, prepare for a quick sale and plan a stress-free moving day in these must-have guides, including 4 FREE downloadable checklists!
You're thinking about moving house but do you know what you can afford? Working out a clear breakdown of your finances will help make your dream move a reality sooner. If you want to clear debt, reserve savings and secure inheritance, you need to know your affordability from the start.
This quick guide for calculating your budget will help you work out a realistic budget and comes with a simple, downloadable PDF calculator that you can print off.
You're searching for the dream home but once you start going to view potential properties it can be difficult not to get attached early on. Take a minute to think about the condition of the roof, the rooms and space available and the surrounding area for example. Don't lose sight of why you want to move house or overlook problems with the property itself.
Read these top tips to help you get the most out of any viewing and print off the handy checklist to take with you on the day!
The exciting time soon comes when you're placing your property on the market and preparing to move home. There are a few simple tricks you could be missing which can prepare your house for a quick sale and secure the right buyer.
Take a moment to read our quick tips to help you prepare your house for successful viewings and turn your house into a must-buy today! Print off our short checklist to help you along the way.
Congratulations, you've found the perfect property and are preparing to move home! The excitement can soon turn to dread, however, if you're facing an ever-growing to-do list. This is common and, rest assured, we're here to help.
This is the start of a new chapter and should be an exciting time, so use this simple guide to prepare for a stress-free moving day and download your moving checklist to help you along the way.
Want to receive our latest property tips, free resources and retirement guides direct to your inbox? Subscribe to our FREE monthly newsletter and keep up-to-date with the latest news from our team.


text:
Indie Game Development Indie Related Chat
Reducing Noise
Discussion in 'Indie Related Chat' started by svero, Aug 3, 2004.
Original Member
I'm in the wrong place.
Dan MacDonald said:
...personally I would prefer if the "community" type chit chat, joke making, fun poll posting, would really just be left for another forum...
#61 Wayward, Aug 3, 2004
GameStudioD
Many of us are in the wrong forum!
Wayward said:
#62 GameStudioD, Aug 3, 2004
Gmicek
((Edited out. Someone else made the same point))
#63 Gmicek, Aug 3, 2004
Dan MacDonald
Moderator Original Member Indie Author
Well some chit-chat in the "General Chat" forum isn't too bad I suppose. But as I said, that's just my personal option. Not one that's shared by all the admin/mods and obviously members of this forum. You won't see me taking any actions that crush the community either, because it's kind of too late for that, the forums used to be almost purely a resource, with each poster adding insights from their own indie businesses or experience. Those days are no longer, and the fact is, today it is more of a community with a lot more of the things that you associate with community, chit chat, jokes, sarcastic threads etc.
What I would like to try to do is provide some options for more "Resource" like features at these forums, while preserving the "community" elements that have begun to spring up.
I have to say though, one of the worst things about the "Community" perspective, is for some reason, whenever a community breaks out, people start to compete for post count. Somehow post count is like a form of notoriety, people will post just about any useless one line comment to get their post count up and it generally contributes to a lot of "noise" (As it's quite difficult to say anything valuable in one line, other then express an emotional response or sarcastic comment).
One thing I would like to be a little clearer on, even when the forums were more "Resource" oriented there still was a community. It just didn't include things like "lol", "haha yeah", or "me too" after someone posted. Members only posted when they had something legitimate to say. Now it seems, people come here to "hang out" and "interact" with their friends. It's a different purpose then what once was, and I honestly feel it makes these forums less professional and more like a bunch of people "just hanging out".
#64 Dan MacDonald, Aug 3, 2004
bantamcitygames
Administrator Original Member Indie Author Greenlit
After reading further points I have altered my position a bit. I agree with Dan on starting a "Professional Indie" section for only indies that have a published (self or otherwise) game.
With that being said, this also gave me another idea: What if the "published indies" had a Star or some other symbol next to their name on every thread/post. This would make reading the forums much easier for people serious about success. I don't know about everyone else, but when I read these forums (a couple times a day) I get a sense for who the professional (and successful) indies are (svero, retro64, etc) and I put more value on THEIR posts as opposed to the newbie thats trying to tell people what makes a successful game.
Steve, Dan: is there a way to implement such a system with the current software?
#65 bantamcitygames, Aug 3, 2004
Dan speaks true. It is the inherent difference between productivity-oriented people and socially-oriented people. Productive people feel that making things is the key to long-term success and reputation. They feel the things they do and the value of their words are the roots of their reputation. Social people believe in marketing themselves, making themselves heard and known, often not for any particular thing they've done or plan to do, but instead for the general act of "contributing to the community." Their concept of "productivity" is... well... saying stuff... writing posts... etc.
My fear is that since the forum is no longer directly associated with Dexterity (a reputable company), people will feel far more leinient in terms of their respect for the value of the forum or the wishes of the moderators. As long as the forum was part of Dexterity there was always this underlying tag of professionalizm that everyone felt-- that the forum was "pretty serious." Now it's just a forum and the whole "this is our community!" aspect will continue to grow even faster than before.
You could always make a members-only forum. By invite only! There are still loads of by-invite-only organizations out there. It's not like taboo. Picking criteria like "only people who have made and/or published a game" is pretty much the same thing anyways. It might seem more fair than hand-picking members in one sense, but might seem a lot less fair in another. Pick your poison.
#66 Air, Aug 3, 2004
Mike Boeh
Administrator Original Member
For now, we are going to do nothing, there are pros and cons to all the methods discussed so far. If noise becomes too much of a problem, we will re-visit the idea... So I am going to go ahead and close the thread...
#67 Mike Boeh, Aug 3, 2004

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
We use cookies to personalise content and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our analytics partners.
I. Personal Information we may collect and process:
For the purposes of this privacy statement, 'Personal Information' is any data which relates to an individual who may be identified from that data, or from a combination of a set of data, and other information which is or may be in possession of Whiteboard.
In general, you may browse our website without providing any Personal Information about yourself. However, certain information such as your IP address, your computers' operating system and browser type, and downloads from the site may be collected in order to provide better usability, troubleshooting, site maintenance, and to understand which parts of the website you're most interested in.
When you request contact via one of the forms on our website, we ask for certain Personal Information such as your name, email address, title, company, telephone number or resume for one or more of the following purposes: user ID creation, identifying you, contacting you and providing access to desirable content based on your preferences, or considering you for employment. After this, we may also track follow-up correspondence, web visits to assist us in establishing a business relationship.
II. Consequences of not providing Personal Information
If you choose not to provide your Personal Information that is mandatory to process your request, we may not be able to provide the corresponding service.
III. Data recipients, transfer, and disclosure of Personal Information:
Whiteboard will seek your consent prior to using or sharing Personal Information for any purpose beyond the requirement for which it was originally collected.
We may share your Personal Information within Whiteboard or with any of its subsidiaries, business partners, service vendors, authorized third-party agents, or contractors located in any part of the world for the purposes of data processing, storage, or to provide a requested service or transaction, after ensuring that such entities are contractually bound by data privacy obligations.
When required, Whiteboard may disclose Personal Information to external law enforcement bodies or regulatory authorities, in order to comply with legal obligations.
IV. Use of Cookies:
Cookies are small text files that, like most other Web servers, we place on your device that you use to access our website. This is done to recognize your device during a session or in your future visits to our website, primarily in order to provide better user experience.
Types of cookies used:
Session cookie: Session cookies remain only as long as a browsing session is active, and are intended to avoid user inconvenience during browsing. These cookies allow websites to link the actions of a user during a browser session and expire at the end of the browsing session. Session cookies also assist the user in navigating the website, and allow the user to access secure parts of the web page when logged in.
Persistent cookie: Persistent cookies are stored on a user's device even after termination of a browsing session. It helps in recalling the preferences or actions of the user. Persistent cookies are used for a variety of purposes such as retaining the visitor's language and regional preference(s) at the end of each browsing session. We may use the services of third-party analytics service provider to analyze cookies to carry out a behavioral analysis in order to enhance user experience and convenience, and also to provide targeted and relevant content to visitors.
Depending on the type and settings of your browser, cookies may be accepted by default. You may change the settings of your browser to delete existing cookies or prevent future cookies from being automatically accepted. If you disable cookies, certain parts and functions of our website may not be available. You can learn more about cookies at www.aboutcookies.org
V. Access, correction, objection of your Personal Information:
Depending on local law, you may access, update, or correct your Personal Information that we hold, including your profile and preferences. You may do so in the corresponding sections where such information was provided. If you have difficulty in updating or accessing your Personal Information as stated above, you may contact us at [email protected]
VI. Data security
Whiteboard adopts reasonable and appropriate security practices and procedures that include administrative, physical security, and technical controls in order to safeguard your Personal Information.
VII. Data retention
Whiteboard may retain your Personal Information as long as there is a business requirement, or if otherwise required under applicable laws.
VIII. Linked websites
Whiteboard may provide links to third-party websites and services. However, Whiteboard is not responsible for the privacy statements, practices, or the contents of such third-party websites.
IX. Updates to this privacy statement
Whiteboard may update this privacy statement as and when the need arises, and the same will be made available on the website. But our commitment to protect the privacy of website users will continue to remain.
Northern California Headquarters
3736 Mt Diablo Blvd #300, Lafayette, CA 94549
© 2007-2021 Whiteboard Technology Group, Inc. All rights reserved.


Safely transport and store large documents.
Taking your plan or presentation with you somewhere? Don't fret about it getting ruined — simply roll up your document or poster and store it in one of our plan tubes.
Made of high-quality, durable plastic, plan tubes give you an easy way to move, protect and store your documents. Use them for all your maps, charts, posters, plans, prints, drawings and more.
Want to know the details? Click here to view the specs for Plan Tubes available at Creffield's West Melbourne, South Melbourne or Geelong locations.


text:
Q: How to show error message to user in MVC calling Web API? I am working on a MVC Web App which is calling a Web API. In my Create (POST) method, a user will enter email addresses of some users in the database. I have a check to enter the email only if the email does not already exist in the database or not. If it already exists, I want to be able to show an error message to the user "Email already exists".
I thought HttpStatusCode.NotFound, "Email exists already." would work, but I think it will only show in PostMan. How can I show it on the MVC side with like ViewBag.ErrorMessage?
API
public IHttpActionResult PostApprovedUsers(ApprovedUsers approvedUsers)
{
    if (!ModelState.IsValid)
    {
        return BadRequest(ModelState);
    }

if (!db.ApprovedUsers.Any(u => u.Email == approvedUsers.Email))
{
    db.ApprovedUsers.Add(approvedUsers);
    db.SaveChanges();
}
else
{
    return Content(HttpStatusCode.NotFound, "Email exists already.");
}
return CreatedAtRoute("DefaultApi", new { id = approvedUsers.Email }, approvedUsers);

MVC Create
public ActionResult Create([Bind(Include = "Email,FirstName,LastName")] ApprovedUsers approvedUsers)
{
    using (WebClient client = new WebClient())
    {
        token = Session.GetDataFromSession<string>("access_token");
            client.Headers.Add("authorization", "Bearer " + token);
            client.UploadValues(apiUrl, "POST", new NameValueCollection()
            {
                { "Email", approvedUsers.Email },
                { "FirstName",approvedUsers.FirstName },
                { "LastName",approvedUsers.LastName }
            });
    }
    return RedirectToAction("Index");
}

A: The main problem with what you were seeing is that you were not in fact doing anything with the return value of webclient. That is ok though, since based on our discussion everything is in the same project and that would not be how you would want to do this using ASP.NET MVC and Web API.
Since these are all in the same project, we do want to combine common functionality but not within a controller. The DB service should be abstracted away into a seperate project - or class - and then injected into both controllers using some form of IoC Container. There are a couple of options available and I personally usually use Ninject for my .NET projects.
Assuming you have that functionality your MVC Controller and API controller should then both program against that abstraction. Interface based programming is how .NET works best.
With that in mind your new API controller would look something like this:
public IHttpActionResult PostApprovedUsers([Bind(Include="Email, FirstName, LastName")]ApprovedUser approvedUser)
    {
        if (!ModelState.IsValid)
        {
            return BadRequest(ModelState);
        }
        if (_db.UserExists(approvedUser))
        {
            return Content(HttpStatusCode.NotFound, "Email exists Already");
        }

        _db.AddUser(approvedUser);
        return CreatedAtRoute("DefaultApi", new {id = approvedUser.Email}, approvedUser);
    }

Where _db is the service that gets injected into the controller. Please not how common functionality such as checking to see if a user exists and adding a user are wrapped behind the abstraction:
public interface IMyFakeDbService
{
    IQueryable<ApprovedUser> ApprovedUsers { get; }

    int RemoveUser(ApprovedUser user);

    int RemoveUser(string email);

    bool UserExists(ApprovedUser user);

    void AddUser(ApprovedUser user);
}

This then brings us to your MVC Controller. The same principle applies; since all the common functionality is in the db service just inject that into the controller instead of calling the API controller. You will see that you can use ModelState.AddModelError here to pass information back into the view.
public ActionResult Create()
    {
        return View();
    }

    [HttpPost]
    public ActionResult Create([Bind(Include = "Email, FirstName, LastName")]ApprovedUser user)
    {
        if (ModelState.IsValid)
        {
            if (!_db.UserExists(user))
            {
                _db.AddUser(user);
                return RedirectToAction("Index");
            }
            ModelState.AddModelError("","A user with that email already exists");
        }
        return View();
    }

Finally

*

*I made a public git repo with a complete project here

*The DB calls should be async. You are wasting server resources if not

*If you want to learn MVC real quick I would suggest Pro ASP.NET MVC 5 and Pro ASP.NET Web API2

A: I always use Ok<T>, where T is a model I defined which have 3 variables, one will identify the status (true, false) and one will be a string message, and one will have data type of List<object> which I need to receive at end point, then you can modify the error message as you want
in your case instead of this
return BadRequest(ModelState);
I will replace it with something like this
return Ok<MyResponse>(new MyResponse{ Message = "Error Message Here", Status = false});
then once you get your content you can desirialize it into your object
MyResponse response = new MyResponse();
HttpResponseMessage response = await client.GetAsync(path);
// ok will return success status code, but you will depend on your status to know if it was success or error happened
if (response.IsSuccessStatusCode)
{
    // Desirialize your result
    response = await response.Content.ReadAsAsync<MyResponse>();
}
// then get the message,
if(response.Status)
{
 //it was fine, return something ..
 }
else {
// Error happened, get your error message and disaply it, if you want as viewbag
ViewBag.ErrorMessage = response.Message;
// do something
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Ready to jump in and make a real impact? Our top-rated internship program provides meaningful work experience in specific functions. At the same time, interns are exposed to the processes of a Fortune 500 organization that's mission-driven, not-for-profit and membership-owned.
Our internship program is designed to support professional and personal development and set students up for success. The benefits we offer reflect the high level of talent our interns bring to our organization.
Medical benefits available (if you are working 30+ hours a week).
Mentorships and campus ambassador programs.
*For interns traveling more than 50 miles.
Thrivent has two corporate offices – one in Minneapolis, Minnesota; the other in Appleton, Wisconsin. Each location offers its own unique culture, vibe and lifestyle.
We also have employees based throughout the country, working remotely or out of our regional financial offices and satellite offices. This includes our San Antonio office, which is highly focused on serving the Latino market.


text:
Q: Shell script to set environment variables I wish to write a shell script to export variables.
Below I have listed the script .
echo "Perform Operation in su mode"
export ARCH=arm
echo "Export ARCH=arm Executed"
export PATH='/home/linux/Practise/linux-devkit/bin/:$PATH';
echo "Export path done"
export CROSS_COMPILE='/home/linux/Practise/linux-devkit/bin/arm-arago-linux-gnueabi-';
echo "Export CROSS_COMPILE done"

But this doesn't seem to work properly. I have to individually execute the commands at the shell prompt instead.

A: Run the script as source= to run in debug mode as well.
source= ./myscript.sh

A: Please show us more parts of the script and tell us what commands you had to individually execute and want to simply.
Meanwhile you have to use double quotes not single quote to expand variables:
export PATH="/home/linux/Practise/linux-devkit/bin/:$PATH"

Semicolons at the end of a single command are also unnecessary.
So far:
#!/bin/sh
echo "Perform Operation in su mode"
export ARCH=arm
echo "Export ARCH=arm Executed"
export PATH="/home/linux/Practise/linux-devkit/bin/:$PATH"
echo "Export path done"
export CROSS_COMPILE='/home/linux/Practise/linux-devkit/bin/arm-arago-linux-gnueabi-' ## What's next to -?
echo "Export CROSS_COMPILE done"
# continue your compilation commands here
...

For su you can run it with:
su -c 'sh /path/to/script.sh'

Note: The OP was not explicitly asking for steps on how to create export variables in an interactive shell using a shell script.  He only asked his script to be assessed at most.  He didn't mention details on how his script would be used.  It could have been by using . or source from the interactive shell.  It could have been a standalone scipt, or it could have been source'd from another script.  Environment variables are not specific to interactive shells.  This answer solved his problem.

A: You need to run the script as source or the shorthand .
source ./myscript.sh

or
. ./myscript.sh

This will run within the existing shell, ensuring any variables created or modified by the script will be available after the script completes.
Running the script just using the filename will execute the script in a separate subshell.

A: I cannot solve it with source ./myscript.sh. It says the source not found error.
Failed also when using . ./myscript.sh. It gives can't open myscript.sh.
So my option is put it in a text file to be called in the next script.
#!/bin/sh
echo "Perform Operation in su mode"
echo "ARCH=arm" >> environment.txt
echo "Export ARCH=arm Executed"
export PATH="/home/linux/Practise/linux-devkit/bin/:$PATH"
echo "Export path done"
export "CROSS_COMPILE='/home/linux/Practise/linux-devkit/bin/arm-arago-linux-gnueabi-' ## What's next to -?" >> environment.txt
echo "Export CROSS_COMPILE done"
# continue your compilation commands here
...

Tnen call it whenever is needed:
while read -r line; do
    line=$(sed -e 's/[[:space:]]*$//' <<<${line})
    var=`echo $line | cut -d '=' -f1`; test=$(echo $var)
    if [ -z "$(test)" ];then eval export "$line";fi
done <environment.txt

A: In my case, I gave extra spaces before and after =.
For example, in my shell file(say deploy.sh)
I initially write
GIT_SHA = $(git rev-parse HEAD)

But I fixed it by using:
GIT_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)

So please note that we should not give any spaces before and after the =.


text:
Chi Centauri (χ Cen, χ Centauri) é uma estrela na constelação de Centaurus. Com uma magnitude aparente visual de 4,34, é visível a olho nu em locais sem muita poluição luminosa. De acordo com medições de paralaxe, está localizada a aproximadamente 503 anos-luz (154 parsecs) da Terra.

Chi Centauri é uma estrela de classe B da sequência principal com um tipo espectral de B2V e temperatura efetiva de 20 800 K, portanto possui coloração azul-branca. Tem uma massa de 8,2 vezes a massa solar, raio de 3,5 raios solares e está brilhando com mais de 2 000 vezes a luminosidade solar. Já foi identificada como estrela variável do tipo β Cephei, com um período de 50 minutos. No entanto, Stankov e Handler (2005) listam-na como um candidato fraco ou rejeitado em seu catálogo de variáveis β Cep.

Pertence ao subgrupo Centaurus Superior-Lupus da associação Scorpius–Centaurus, a associação OB mais próxima do Sol. Possui uma velocidade peculiar de 17,6 ± 2,9 km/s, e não é considerada uma possível estrela fugitiva. Sua idade, estimada por modelos evolucionários, é de 12 milhões de anos. A estrela HD 123021, de tipo espectral A7III/IV e magnitude 8,32, a uma separação de 85 segundos de arco, possui paralaxe e movimento próprio similares aos do Chi Centauri, podendo ser uma companheira física.

Ver também
Lista de estrelas da constelação de Centaurus
Phi Centauri
Designação de Bayer

Ligações externas

Phi and Chi Centauri Stars

Objetos de Bayer
Constelação de Centaurus
Estrelas de classe B da sequência principal

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee, a not-for-profit organization that promotes employee involvement, job retention, and economic development through the cooperative efforts of employees and management in Ohio.
Columbus Area Labor-Management Committee is a neutral organization. We provide services that bring workers and managers together to identify the unique needs of the organization that will sustain and enhance it to be more competitive.
Since 1986, CALMC has worked with public and private sector employers and employees to help them achieve their mutual goals.
We are specialists in labor-management cooperation with over 20 years experience.
We are a trusted neutral third party.
Our service focus (not profit focus) permits low-cost, high value support for all organizations, from the smallest start-up to the largest organizations.
Our flexibility enables us to respond quickly with collaborative initiatives uniquely designed to meet your specific needs.
CALMC provides long-term support to our customers. Most of our customers have been with us for several years, demonstrating their satisfaction with CALMC services.
Helps build labor-management cooperation, which is vital for an efficient work environment.


For thirsty conference-goers after a hard day at the workshops and lectures.
This route is downhill all the way, past Iffley Church (Norman period) and part of Iffley Village, across the lock and up the riverside path.
Here's a Quiet Route between Oxford's main railway station and the Community Centre at Rose Hill. It follows the scenic River Thames riverside path, using the old Gasworks Bridge to cross to the West bank, then Iffley Lock to cross back. About half an hour, with only one very short hostile section along Oxpens Road.
It's been devised to help train travellers attending the national conference and workshops on 10th November 2017 organised by Cyclox: "Shifting Gear: a radical Change for Cycling". Get your ticket now!
Hire bikes are plentiful at the Rail Station. You can rent from Oxonbike (dock-based: e-assist, if you like); Donkey Republic (dockless, with gears and rear rack; mobile app based); Brompton (famous folding bike, from their BromptonDock pod); Ofo and Pony (dockless bike-share via mobile app (Ofo; Pony); single-trip, no gears); Cycle.Land (peer-to-peer bike share: AirBnB for bikes).


text:
Václav Pšenička (1906–1961) – czechosłowacki sztangista
 Václav Pšenička (1931–2015) – czechosłowacki sztangista


text:
Porsche to challenge London CO2 penalty in court
Prestige/performance car maker Porsche is to challenge London Mayor Ken Livingstone's punitive £25-a-day "gas guzzler" traffic-charge, to be levied on cars with high CO2 emissions. The car firm will seek a judicial review of the mayor's policy. "A massive congestion charge increase is quite simply unjust," Porsche's UK boss …
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:18 GMT Gordon
reintroduce the 914?
I can see why they're pissed. This is going to crucify their UK sales. Maybe if they built more lightweight, efficient cars and didn't concentrate on 80s style heavyweight sports cars they'd be in a better position to meet this challenge in places other than the courts? I doubt there is anything stopping you taking a Lotus Elise into London - with a little work (smaller, more efficient engine) it might even get into the lower bracket! Maybe deal 'ole Porker need to think in terms of this being similar to the fuel-crisis of the late 70s, when they built cars like the 914 with lightweight materials, modest engines, reasonable performance and good economy? The trouble there is that London has "gone first", and there isn't a big enough market to support a special model just for the UK, let alone one just for London.
Personally I'd rather see The Major fixing public transport (tube, rail, buses etc) than attempting to torture everyone into using the substandard, dirty, irregular, uncomfortable system we have now regardless of how bad it is. But that would require hard work, imagination, determination and money and wouldn't be terribly glamourous. This is easy, obvious, hi-tech, zietgiesty and will make cash out of people who cannot change their cars due to outstanding finance or the need for a big motor.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:20 GMT Robert Hill
Hah - 4x4s with turbodiesels rule!
Once and for all, let's stop screaming about 4x4s and the environment - even under Red Ken's ruinous rules, 4x4s with turbodiesels (which is the engine that most real 4x4 off-road users want anyway) can be shown to be eco friendly. Or at least no worse than the majority of other cars.
My 2005 Land Rover Discovery turbodiesel had decent CO2 emissions, and gave me a combined, measured 27 mpg in mixed highway / city driving. In what is admittedly a 4000 lb square box with permanent 4 wheel drive. It "only" got to 60 mph in 10.8 seconds, and while it would happily cruise at 90 mph on the M1 motorway, it really couldn't break 100 except downhill. But my point being, 0-6 in under 11 seconds is all you really need anyway, and we all have to admit that no one should be breaking 95 on the M1 anyway.
It's not about 4x4s, it's about asshats that feel the need to put stomping huge V8 petrol engines in them, even though they are among the worst engines to actually take offroad. For those people, may I suggest an Audi S6 estate?
I got rid of the Disco when I changed jobs, and have waited to buy anything because of these new rules. Now I can safely look to the Freelander turbodiesel, and know that I have avoided the congestion charge madness of the £25 band...
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
Filthy evil taxis !!
of course even the most recent london taxi ( the LTI TX4) has co2 emissions of 233 g/km in automatic form. So why is it exempt from the £25 Charge ?????
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:20 GMT Jamie
Livingstons Lies
Good 'ol Kenny keeps saying he brought this in to reduce congestion, now it is pollution. If he really means that and it is not a way to get extra funds to finance his trips to exotic places then he should stick the money raised from the year in a bank account. Then the next year use the money to hire police specifically to target those areas affected by the congestion zone to get illegal drivers and cars off the roads.
If he really does care about the London public then go to Gordon and request that this special branch be given powers that allow them to confiscate cars from people without a valid license, no insurance, no tax and then auction them off, with the money then going back into the police or to different beautifying projects.
Lame excuse
"... This includes a lot of vehicles not normally seen as evil, for instance, often bought by parents with more than two children owing to the increasingly strict seat-safety rules. ..."
I'm always surprised with how people can come up with lame excuses to justify their desire to buy big cars. You can easily fit two and more kids in any mid-class car without giving up on the seat-safety.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:20 GMT Karl Lattimer
"which clearly will have a very limited effect on CO2 emissions"
as we've recently seen, people with porches etc... generally can't afford to pay their insurance, never mind the CO2 charge. So the fact of the matter is that these people will either be so stuck with their gas guzzlers that they'll bankrupt themselves, or they'll change their behavior to save their money.
I know I'd rather drive a small car and not pay a charge, maybe I'm just smarter than people who drive porches... not difficult I admit :)
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:22 GMT Dominic Tristram
If you can not only afford a Porsche but also drive it into central London every day, 25 quid is nothing to you. I hope this gets laughed out of court. I have misgivings about people forcing their pollution upon us as it is, but they could at least have the decency of paying up.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:40 GMT Phill Holland
If you can afford a porsche, you could surely either afford the charge, or too buy a car with a smaller engine size (probably defeating the point of buying the porsche in the first place).
However, a two door sports car designed to be as light as possible perhaps shouldn't be classed in the same league as a heavy 4x4.
I'm not sure what the point of driving a sports car into essentially a large car park is anyway. I'd be too scared about somebody hitting it, every car I've seen in london has some sort of dent in it.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:40 GMT Andy
Go fast?
Just how fast can your Porsche go in a crowded London street?
Why have a six liter engine capable of enough acceleration to rip your eyeballs down your throat when you'll have to stop just a few yards later.
We get prats over here in big 4x4 trucks. I see housewives driving 4x4 vehicles capable of climbing huge gradients, overcoming great big rocks, and jumping with ease over canyons and whatnot. They're being used to do the shopping and collect the kids from schools. And not a scratch on the expensive bodywork of this very capable off-road mechanical marvel. No mud, no scratches, no dents. Bloody thing has never had a sniff of the countryside let alone been driven up an embankment that requires raised suspension, 4x4 drive, and locked bloody differentials.
Besides I'm not rich enough to afford a Porsche so I'm all in favour of making those bastards suffer.
Fuck 'em
If they can afford a Porsche, they can no doubt afford the tax. Half of them are probably tax dodgers anyway.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:40 GMT Anton Ivanov
Porshe owners should pay even more
The charge should be normalised versus seat carrying capacity. Actually so should be the taxes and excise.
This will decrease the taxes and fees for cars like the Zafira while still keeping them in the right bracket for the owners of erectile disfunction compensators like the Carrera or the Cayman. Same for other Chelsea tractor owners.
I'm sure this will make a massive difference
Last time I checked, all the private cars in the UK were collectively responsible for 0.3% of global greenhouse gas emissions. What percentage of the 0.3% is represented by >225g/km cars entering central London, I wonder??
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:40 GMT David Evans
Peel off the green paint...
...and you'll find Ken's true red colours underneath. This has nothing to do with congestion, nothing to do with emissions and everything to do with his class hatred. Porsche, symbol of Ken's 80's yuppie nemesis, is exactly what he wants to target. Its also why he extended the zone west into affluent Kensington & Chelsea and not into areas with worse congestion (like south and east).
There's already emissions charges for cars, the road fund licence and fuel duty; and it disgusts me that this martinet can pull this kind of stunt unilaterally. And I know his supporters will say "vote him out" but unfortunately all those millions who work, but don't live in London, don't get a vote do they?
Tuesday 19th February 2008 13:40 GMT Iain
That extra revenue...
...should be ring-fenced for public transport and environmental projects. I would be happy to use the TFL systm if it was a) reliable and b) as cheap (per mile for eg) as driving.
I quite happily buzz around in a '05 1.9 TDI Seat Ibiza doing combined 46mpg (which still out-performs johnny 4x4 doing 0-60 in 9.8secs with a top speed of 130ish and costs only a fifth of the price). Using the latest figures for average diesel price that comes to 10.9p per mile.
To drive from Uxbridge to Camden (my usual commute of 18 miles) it costs me £1.96. To do the equivalent journey on the Tube costs £4 (or £3.50 on Oyster). What financial incentive is there for me to get the Tube, which probably takes 1 hour longer, and is often closed/delayed?
What's the difference between a hedgehog and a Porsche
Well there's no congestion charge for driving a hedgehog, oh and the pricks are on the outside of the hedgehog.
£25, no thanks
I wouldnt even TAKE £25 from Ken to visit London, nevermind give him £25.
The biggest problem
with the introduction of this fee is that it is largely unannounced. So there will certainly be people badly hit by the additional 365x£25 annual fee for owning a car, to the extent of them having problems with paying it. If it was announced as an "in five years" plan, then people would have the chance to adopt. As it is, expect a lot of cheap mid-range people-carriers on the market.
"Personally I'd rather see The Major fixing public transport (tube, rail, buses etc) than attempting to torture everyone into using the substandard, dirty, irregular, uncomfortable system we have now regardless of how bad it is."
Well, I've been around a little, and so far, the public transportation system in London are among the best, quickest, cleanest in large cities in Europe, as well as comparatively affordable. If you want a laugh, try public transportation in, say, Hamburg, Germany or for a real hoot, Marseille. If you want to get stuck halfway to the railway station with the next bus dropping by at four the next morning, try Luebeck, Germany.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:06 GMT Bryce Prewitt
@ Peel off the green paint
Yes, and isn't it apparent that by reading all the comments here (and elsewhere on the internet) that there's an entire generation of fucking belligerent retards that will do anything and everything in their power to legislate that which they don't like out of existence?
Class hatred doesn't even begin to describe this self-important phenomenon. I'd like to personally hang all these twats up and read them the riot act. I hate Americans about as much as anyone but Noel Gallagher's right, the British are the biggest cry-babies in the whole wide world. We're never happy with anything, ever.
Oh well, in twenty years it'll all come back around and a newer, younger, more self-important generation will start blowing it in the old crusties' faces. Once you start down this slippery slope it only gets worse.
Or maybe the younger generation will be smart and realize that tolerance is the best policy? Nah...
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:06 GMT Steve
Re: Robert Hill
The answer is for greenpeace or some other bunch of hippies to cover random 4x4's in the street with cow sh**. If they drive in conditions that justify a 4x4, its unlikely that the owner will be fussed. If not, there will of course be plenty of publicity.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:06 GMT Peter Hawkins
@Robert Hill Diesels Pollute more
Funny how all the oil burner drivers whine on about CO2 emissions as if they were the only pollutant. In a city environment by far the most dangerous emissions to people are PM10's and soot, emitted by guess what - diesels. You only have to watch some moron in TDi flooring it away from the lights and you'd swear the thing was running on house coal from the smoke. That's also why my air-con automatically switches to re-circulate after a couple of mins behind a diesel.
When diesels are as clean as petrol cars, i.e. active catalytic converters and soot filters, then you can lecture petrol drivers on the environment. Until then, as I drive round behind your stinking hulk, my petrol car is actually cleaning up after you.
Paris, because she knows all about emissions.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:06 GMT adnim
Not enough
Any car over 2.0 litres £30.
Any 4x4 £60.
It should cost £2000 a year to tax any private vehicle over 2.0 litres.
It should cost £5000 a year to tax a 4x4 unless one is a farmer.
In fact I would like to see 4x4's banned from our roads.
Flame away.
If this revenue generating scam is about pollution, why doesn't it get taxed at source and added to the price of the fuel [1]? It will be UK wide as an added bonus and there is virtually no escape from it.
[1] What do you mean they taxed the fuel as much as they could get away with it?
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:06 GMT Matthew
Ken is up to rubbish again. I think that improving public transport and freezing fares is a great idea, but it's being sold with a ton of top-spin.
If he was concerned with emissions, he'd expand the zone east over the most heavily polluted parts of London.
If it looks like a tax and smells like a tax, it's just Ken lining his budgets. Why the man needs his own newspaper, I don't know.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:06 GMT Peter D'Hoye
@David Evans
Yup, that is how it works, because it is the people who _live_ there that suffer the pollution.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:06 GMT Mike Tree
seats!
I think it is daft that in a cogestion charge zone, a car carrying 8 people (Like my Toyota Estima) will be taxed the same as a 2 seater which probably only has one person in it 99% of the time..
Re: Lame Excuse
As a father of 4 month old twins I can assure you that it is impossible to fit them, and the stuff that you need to take with them when you go out, into a "mid-class car".
Our "mid-class" car (BMW 3 series) had to go the minute we bought our buggy and was swapped for a Renault Scenic belonging to the in-laws. Even this is too small but, as we are leaving the country to get away from all the communists like Ken who have taken over, we are making do by not taking the babies out of the flat very often and, when we do, taking 2 cars!
A friend of mine who has 4 kids also can't get them, and his wife, into a "mid-class car" as these generally only seat 5. And with the booster seat laws etc you can't really use the middle seat anyway, So they also need a rather large car for them and the buggies, equipment etc that goes along with having a family (and before we get the replies of "their fault for having a large family and it being their choice; the 4 kids are 2 sets of twins so it isn't exactly their fault).
So if the choice is between a big car or two then I think the big car is more congestion and CO2 friendly!
"You can easily fit two and more kids in any mid-class car without giving up on the seat-safety."
I'd like to see you fit more than 2 adults and 2 child seats in ANY mid-sized car.
I have a Laguna (classed as a large family car) and you can't do it with that.
Porsche owners
I'm becoming increasingly glad I don't live in the UK - it appears that as a filthy rich owner of a $2000 1984 Porsche 944, which gets something around 35mpg, I would be charged fifty bucks a *DAY* to own a car in London? *FIFTY*?
I like Britain and all, but man... you guys really *are* bonkers. And the "only filthy rich own Porsches" thing is total bull - there are rafts of 928s, 944s, 968s, even 911s that are a few years old and will run far less than any given new Toyota.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:38 GMT Alex Johnson
Let's separate out the jealousy from the issue. The jealousy is just pathetic - and don't kid yourselves, that's what it is.
Andy Goss is quite right: there are a couple of issues here. First, Ken is conflating congestion and climate change. Not to be pedantic, but CO2 is NOT a pollutant. It's a part of our atmosphere. Any car with a catalytic converter prodocuses water and carbon dioxide as exhaust gasses. That's just about it, and that's why if you want to top yourself ina agarage, you have to find an old banger with no catalytic converter. That climate change is a serious issue, I don't doubt, but why is this in the hands of the grubby little mayor? It's like when he starts having diplomatic relations with other countries - oh I forgot, he already does that. Get on with running London, not with running a parallel government. Is being mayor of one of the world's greatest cities not a big enough job for you Ken? And, as we know, he is planning to increase the numbers of vehicles which will be extempt. Hang on, how does that help *congestion*? Isn't that what we voted for? If we are going to be concerned about greenhouse gasses, let's be worried things worth worrying about, like all you people who eat red meat; like balancing China's desire for growth (good) with the power they will be consuming to get there (not so good); like making alternatives like solar more economically viable. And let's do this by getting people on side, not alienating them for really no quantifiable gain or purpose whatsoever.
Second, this is classic - if ham-fisted - attempt to divide and rule, and as a Londoner it stinks. It stinks that Ken gambles a whole class of people were never going to vote for him anyway, and that they are therefore in a position to be victimised and piloroed as he mugs away to those he thinks will vote for him. I don't want to seem hopelessly naive, but no one should applaud that, whatever you think of 4x4's and Porsches.
In short, this is tokenistic nonsense, and politics of the cheapest kind.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:38 GMT Jon
under 121, not 120
"emitting less than 120 grammes of CO2 per kilometre "
close, it's free for cars in the VED A and B bands which means it's for cars emitting less than 121g of CO2/Kilometre
Admit it, you're glad it's not you
You drive a typical 170gms / km car, get a 90% residents discount, so pay 80 pence a day. Somebody who bought a 4x4 long ago pre 2001, long before climate change was on the agenda, pays 25 quid. 31 times more.
They emit 1.5 times the CO2 per km, yet pay 31 times the charge. They even pay extra for the fuel. Now they have to find the money to replace that car too, and will have to sell on that car outside of London. They're paying for your sins and your damn glad they've been singled out not you.
But don't worry, your time will come.
Sooner or later you'll be in the group that faces the punitive punishment. Sooner or later you'll be taking one for the rest of us.
As for fixing climate change, where does he imagine these cars will go?
Tuesday 19th February 2008 14:38 GMT Chris Long
"I'm just smarter than people who drive porches..."
Pffft. You've probably got one of those new hybrid verandahs instead, I assume? Personally, I plan to buy a fully-electric balcony as soon as they're available. And don't got me started on those twats driving massive roof-top gardens around central London.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 15:00 GMT Mike Lovell
No tax!
How about some incentives, rather than just tax-smacking.
If they gave you a big discount on alternative fuel cars and also made sure that by 20xx, x% of garages would have to provide this fuel. Might just help.
But of course it has little to do with the environment, and a lot to do with raising tax from the moral high ground.
Also on the subject of public transport I know many a person verbally abused or threatened on the London transport networks (I hear the buses are the worst). Any police about?
Whatever you think about the appropriateness of this measure, it's clearly disengenuous to claim that "it's fair because of the polluter pays principle". This charge is specifically about charging people with big-engined vehicles a *disproportionate* amount, as a punitive / controlling measure. Nothing to do with fairness or egalitarianism. Someone with a 4.0 litre car already pays more fuel duty per mile, in direct proportion to the amount of fuel they use. That's perfectly fair, but hasn't resulted in the outcome the politicians want, so they simply change the rules.
Thickies
Drivers of these big cars in London (as in any urban area) must be a bit thick, quite frankly.
I don't give a S***t
cos I will just claim the extra cost in expenses so the tax man will lose out in the long run. I can afford the extra anyway.
Think I will go and buy a hummer to go with my 4 litre gas guzzling high emission two seater sports car and use them on alternate days.
BLX to KEN
Paris cos like me she can afford the chump change.
@Peter D'Hoye
What pollution? This isn't about diesel particulate, this isn't about SO2 or carbon monoxide, this isn't about lead. All of which might be somewhat valid. This is about tax and politics, but let's for one second pretend that it is about CO2, a colourless odourless non-toxic gas making up around 4% of what you exhale. Most of us aren't choking to death from our own breath, and nor are the plants which depend on it to live. This isn't even about noise pollution as an idling taxi or bus, or a motorbike, will blow away any of these vehicles in terms of noise.
So, you're left with CO2 as a source of climate change. Fine - but I think you'll find that doesn't respect the dotted line on Ken's map, and more to the point, nor do the emissions from power generation and third world growth.
You may not like 4x4's or Porsche's, but their mere exisence in London isn't harming you in any measurable way. Unless of course you get run over by one, but I think you'll find an eco-fiendly bus could finish you off even more efficiently.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 15:19 GMT Frank Bough
Arsehole
"I got rid of the Disco when I changed jobs, and have waited to buy anything because of these new rules. Now I can safely look to the Freelander turbodiesel, and know that I have avoided the congestion charge madness of the £25 band..."
Doesn't driving around in a pretend truck make you feel like a total cock?
Weird economics
"To drive from Uxbridge to Camden (my usual commute of 18 miles) it costs me £1.96."
What are you on, a pedal cycle? Cars cost MUCH more than just their petrol to run them.
The motoring magazines give the cost per mile of most cars and from memory they're mostly in the 30 to 50p per mile range -- and even that doesn't include insurance (because it varies too much from person to person).
So your comparison price should be £6 to £9 and you'll find that's way more than the maximum daily oyster card or the daily share of a season ticket -- either of which would cover you for the return journey as well as the outward.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 15:19 GMT randomtask
@ Anonymous Coward
"Well, I've been around a little, and so far, the public transportation system in London are among the best, quickest, cleanest in large cities in Europe, as well as comparatively affordable. If you want a laugh, try public transportation in, say, Hamburg, Germany or for a real hoot, Marseille. If you want to get stuck halfway to the railway station with the next bus dropping by at four the next morning, try Luebeck, Germany"
Remember that London is the Capital city so its unfair to compare it with regional hubs. Compare it with other Capitals and you will find the public transport system in london lacking. It costs a bloody fortune for one! In Paris you can get from A (anywhere in paris) to B (anywhere else in paris) for €1.50 and its fast, efficient and clean!
More Ranting Insight
"Any car over 2.0 litres £30.
In fact I would like to see 4x4's banned from our roads."
Yes but WHY?
Tuesday 19th February 2008 15:32 GMT Fenton
Kick em while they are already down
This isn't really going to hit those with the top end of the car market. Yes they probably could afford £25 a day. Then again they may just go out any buy another car that doesn't cost, thus adding to congestion even further as the Gas guzzler will be parked up in London.
The people this is going to hit are those who got a fairly sensible car over the last few years, i'm talking a Saab 93 2l, an Astra 2l, an Audi A4 V6, even a VW Sharan 2l (all these cars are in Group G)
Why do people buy these cars? To travel in relative comfort over long distances for work and play.
They are already being hit by increases fuel costs, Car tax costs, etc, etc.
Now they are being hit by this TAX on relative success.
So now they have to waste even more money in trying to change car.
Here's another statistic. If you took your G-Wiz car and put an equivalent powered Petrol engine in it, rather than battery the CO2 emmisions would be even less than the stated 65g/KM (even that figure is bogus as it is calculated completly differently to a normal car). Why because your local power station is less efficient than a car engine. Plus the G-Wiz weighs so much because of all the batteries
Sweet sweet irony.
Pedestrianise the lot
How many people *need* to drive in central london? With no private cars on the road, the busses would run fantastically and cycling would be a joy.
Just let the cabs, busses and delivery drivers in and some sort of mass park and ride for people who live in the zone and want to keep a car for sojourns out of the city.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 15:59 GMT Jason Harvey
Just glad I'm in the states
cause my, soon to be antique (24 years or older vehicle), 1985 Pontiac would not even come close to passing under any line that has been drawn up here. It barely passes the grandfathered emissions tests here in Texas. Hopefully this next test will pass cleaner since it's got a new catalytic and numerous parts replaced and tuned up, but I won't keep my hopes up.
Global warming is good anyhow... it'll make the frozen north/south a tropical paradise. Start buying up the permafrost land now folks, in 50 years it'll be prime for resale!
@If you can afford a porsche
Even as a long time Reg reader, I'm still occasionally astonished by the purely reactionary comments in these sections.
How many of you who blurted out "If you can afford a porsche..." have any idea how little various models of Porche actually cost? Not as much a you might think. Owning a well built and reliable car with a decent motorway speed is usually the point of buying one, but there are a lot of people commenting here who seem to think its all about bling and the 0-60 numbers.
@Lame Excuse - what a crock of shit mate. My missus is a child minder, and she can fit *three* kids in a tiny Vauxhall Agila, along with all the junk you need to deal with a bunch kids out doors. If you can't get 2 in a mid sized car, you're doing something very wrong.
@4x4s - I think its becoming quite clear that the crowd of people going on about how bad these are have as big a problem as the anti-porche crowd. Just because a vehicle has a 4-wheel-drive capable gearbox doesn't automatically make it crime against humanity to own one. There are many much more dangerous and polluting vehicles driving around inner London on a daily basis which should be taken off the roads.
@Frank Bough
Nope, not when I am a landscape photographer as a hobby, and often take my truck where you are too lazy and pantywaisted to ever get to. And considering I lived on the Yorkshire Moors (Meltham) when I had the Discovery, I can certainly show you a lot of landscape YOU couldn't even walk without breaking your little thin ankle, or ripping one of your painted fingernails. If you've seen the Top Gear when Clarkson takes a Disco up that mountain, well, mine has done similar.
The Freelander is just a compromise - now that I live in central London, the Disco is just too big to park easily. Otherwise I'd get another in a second. Or a Defender, 'cept my gf won't be seen dead in a Defender...
Tuesday 19th February 2008 16:11 GMT Mark
Smorgesboord.
Diesels Pollute more: PM10's fall out and don't continue to rise with merely time passing. CO2 does accumulate.
Fitting kids in cars: twenty years ago a Vauhall Viva had to fit four kids and two parents. All the kids were teenaged and none of us "svelte". We fit.
Full 8 seater: well you're sharing the £25 per day fare amongst 8 people rather than through one.
Banned 4x4's: Why not? They aren't needed except for military use. Farmers in wales use half a dozen cheap escorts and use the tractor when one gets stuck. No need for 'em. So rather than tax (which makes it more an elite item, since the rich can always afford more) ban 'em.
Ringfence the tax for public transport: Yes.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 16:13 GMT breakfast
Not all bad news
I live outside london and I've been thinking about getting a 4x4 in a legitimate will be going offroad, will be towing, will be doing agricultural work, kind of way.
If Ken's big plan goes through there may be a whole bunch of decent 4x4s turning up cheap.
Cushty.
While you're at it Ken, why don't you levy the congestion charge on people?
Not that I'd drive in London anyway, given the idiots on the road there in general, but as the driver of a Subaru, let me point just two things out to all the "we're so green, we're so clever, we drive diesels / superminis" brigade:
1) I have to pay tax at a higher rate than you ALREADY.
2) My fuel costs are higher than yours ALREADY, ** AND ** the government taxes fuel at *** 75% *** (so about 82p+ per litre).
3) What TFL claims, and what is reality are two different things entirely - it's just more spin from a government that promises but never delivers.
Reading statistics from the department of transport, the AA et al from this Sunday's papers, congestion charging has made little, if no difference at all (they claimed it reduced traffic by 10%, but it's since gone back up).
4) HOW is allowing more cars to come in without paying the charge going to REDUCE emissions?
5) The congestion charge is supposed to be used to better London transport (preferably it would subsidise it), yet at weekends the lines are closed or partly closed on Saturdays, and the cost of tickets are now the most expensive in the world!
Ken is a typical Labour politician - all talk and no delivery, but people who support him are even bigger fools for believing his lies.
Re: Pedestrianise the lot
Sorry, I do not see why Stagecoach, Arriva, First other primary sources of downtown pollution should be privileged.
If they decide to provide clean non-polluting transport like trolleybuses - yes fire away, can we have more of that ASAP please. As a pedestrian or cyclist I will be very happy to share the road with them. If a 5th world middle of nowhere small regional centers like Timishoara in Romania or Pazardzhik in Bulgaria can afford that, London should be able to do that as well. Otherwise - why the f*** are we paying all these "green" taxes.
It takes only a few millions to put the pilons and convert a bus route into a trolleybus one. In most cases you can reuse the street lighting or fix it to buildings.
A trolleybus does not produce any emissions when sitting in the middle of a traffic jam. It is safer than a bus (no fuel on board), quieter (no diesel to bring agricultural overtones to the city) and can be driven by any bus driver with minimum training.
I live about a mile outside London, so I have a Kent postcode instead of a London one, and I spend most of my waking hours inside London, but Ken can set up his little exclusion zones for people who don't vote for him and I have no democratic say in the matter? How is that fair? In fact, as a pollution charge it sucks because it will force people to use more fuel to avoid the zone!
I wouldn't mind if there was any logic to this on real environmental grounds, but this is just the cult of C02 being used to create an iniquitous tax. Again. And what's worse it will probably increase congestion AND raise overall pollution levels.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 16:54 GMT Joe Blogs
@ Robert Hill
"and we all have to admit that no one should be breaking 95 on the M1 anyway."
Ahh.. so because your vehicle can only do 95Mph, anything above that is wrong, anyone who goes above this is wrong. But as your vehicle can do upto 95 then doing upto 95 is OK, even thought the limit on the M1 is 70Mph.
Knob!
...I hate Americans about as much as anyone...
Bryce, I'm an American and I don't hate you.
I do agree with you on the rest of that sentence.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 18:37 GMT multipharious
Do they tax Electric Car Ozone Emissions?
Just a thought, but as the Mayor has already failed miserably to dissuade people from driving into London with the red zone tax...what does he do next? Taxes them further! Got to pay for the overbudget Olympics somehow. Twit. Yet he wraps his greedy tax sack in the holy veil of the Green hypocrites. The best cover I have seen in a while was on the front of a Lufthansa magazine , "Umwelt ist Umsatz" translation: Environment is Business. Obviously not intended in the way that I am framing it but...you greens better realize that there are wolves in your midst sullying your purity.
All I have to say is I wish Porsche the best of luck in their legal battle against this envirocrite.
Then again, I must point one thing out...nothing like a blowing your nose after a day out and about in London. Is that diesel dust there on my hankerchief? Or is it tire dust? Granulated rat droppings? Target whatever the hell it is, but it sure as shit did not come out of the back of a Porsche.
It's not about clean air....
... CO2 doesn't kill you (well, unless you're breathing in concentrated amounts, but the same can be said of any gas, even oxygen actually). The gasses that come out the back of a modern high performance car, are cleaner than the air that goes in, in a modern city - thanks to all the crap that buses, taxis, other diesel powered transport throws out. So if you want clean air, you want more Porsche drivers in London.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 18:41 GMT Herby
What would be the charge for...
...an M1A1 Abrams Tank? It would be quite nice in central London, as it would have EXTREME right of way. Kinda a true BOFH type vehicle. Just a small pipsqueak horn which anyone who ignores does so at their own peril.
Who needs a 4X4 when you have artillery you can point at the offender.
Congestion, NO PROBLEM!
Of course, my Porsche preference is for older 356 models (Specifically a 356SC) like the one in my dad's garage!
Tuesday 19th February 2008 19:18 GMT Mark Tebbutt
Sends a clear message to performance car makers to do better
Hopefully this will send a clear message to performance car manufactures that its time to abandon the dinosaur internal combustion tech (fossil fuels get it) and move to electric vehicles as they can provide better performance than a Porsche 911 for roughly the same cost www.teslamotors.com .
Critics point out that electric vehicles simply move the pollution to the power station. This is true but due to the efficiency of electric vehicles the amount of pollution per mile driven is greatly reduced and can more readily be tackled at a few dozen power stations than from millions of individual cars. http://www.teslamotors.com/efficiency/well_to_wheel.php
If an individual has a desire to drive a zero pollution car the addition of around 3KW of photovoltaic panels to their home would provide enough zero pollution electricity to drive 20,000 miles a year even in cloudy old Britain.
People who believe that modern car exhausts only emit CO2 and water are grossly miss informed. All car exhausts emissions are toxic and do damage to peoples health. A recent report by the lancet claims" Living too near a busy road could stunt a child's lung development, US research involving 3,677 children suggests." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6297701.stm
Tuesday 19th February 2008 19:18 GMT bygjohn
Urban 4x4s
For those people who insist on asking why anyone would buy a 4x4 for urban use, I'm happy to share: it's easier for my 93-year-old father to get in and out of rather than curling down into the Ka I had before, and it's much more comfortable now the loonies have covered all the urban streets with speed bumps, especially those which are badly maintained and have potholes in them (as well as the roads themselves). Half the urban roads round here make cart tracks look like the M6...
BTW it's a 3-door RAV4, gets 30 to the gallon (better than the 850 Mini which was my first car) and isn't much longer than the Ka. And if it was crushed tomorrow, it would waste way more carbon than running it till it falls apart, something the anti-4x4 jihadists conveniently forget.
what - take more than two kids in the car!
There's a stupid statement from someone who has never tried it. Tried it with my mark 4 golf. Couldn't. stupid frickin lap belt in the middle, even if 3 across the seat had fitted.. Can't put them in the front 'cos of the airbag. traded it in for a people carrier - at least now I can take half a football team to matches, but its dull as dishwater to drive.
This is everything to do with envy (divide and rule) and nowt to with saving the planet. All of you making the comments about school run 4x4s and porsche with the pricks on the inside, be honest with yourselves and admit its because you don't like the owners. Getting the cars off the streets of london won't save the planet. It will just mean the porsche drivers swap them for turbo diesel sports cars and stuff us all with PM10s. You actually hurt those in the middle with people carriers or estates and petrol engines for whom a car purchase is a big deal and who now have a perfectly good car that is rendered useless because of a stupid bit of politicking. but hey at least the mob is happy
The flood is coming
Ban 4x4's yeah, yeah, any bandwagon, let me on....
Noticed the weather - lots of rain, lots of of flooding, lots of 4x4's rescuing people. BBC won't show it as their a bit left like that and its important to be biased against 4x4's.
Ever noticed a great big river running through London, and a barrier that technically isn't quite big enough trying to hold back the tide. Some of you'll be glad there are vehicles that can drive in up to 4' of water in a few years time. Some people have been very glad over the last couple of years for them.
My 4x4 is fully equipped for deep wading because its fun (shock, horror) and because for those who get outside the M25 it does rain sometimes and things flood. Oh and the fact that I'd prefer not to die when my Micra is crushed by a truck, and that the carbon footprint of my 4x4 is considerably less than your Toyota Prius (or is it Taleban?) over its lifetime because my 4x4 isn't full of TOXIC WASTE called batteries and I don't need a nuclear power station to charge it. Oh and it won't be on a scrapheap in 5 years time because nobody wants a secondhand one.
How about the greenies stopped smoking weed, then there'd be less CO2 emissions, less drug dealing, less crime, less cost to the NHS for the related mental health problems, less car crashes from people driving stoned. No didn't think you'd go for that somehow.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 22:14 GMT Chris G
stop breathing
Just a thought , the average person in his(or her) breath releases around 432 litres of CO2 per day at rest, that works out to ten million people in London producing around 8,6 tonnes of CO2 each day. I think it is about time for a tax on breathing in the interests of the environment, Of course if you are a lardy arsed jogger trying to lose weight ,your out put is going to be much higher than a resting average 65kilo type so if you want to save money, relax and have a heart attack.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 22:14 GMT E_Nigma
I hope they win!
The measure really will accomplish nothing (marginal effect on pollution and zero on congestion), except that, apparently, it will get the guy some popularity, which, I believe, was his intention in the first place. I'm rather disappointed as I seem to detect quite a bit of jealousy in some of the comments.
Has anyone managed to measure Ken's emissions?
I mean, it's quite a lot of hot air..
For good measure, the CO2 output per person in his office during the extensive use of taxis should also be taken into account.
A 4x4 is pointless in a town or city, Safer? @ 30 miles per hour (60 if head on with some retard using his/her phone) safer for whom? Certainly not those on the outside of it. They obscure the view of the road ahead and encourage further arrogance in those who have no manners or respect for other road users.
How long have 4x4's been plaguing our cities? We seemed to manage perfectly well before they became a trendy fashion accessory. Jealousy? Perhaps a little, I do wish sometimes I didn't give a fugg about anything but myself.
A 2.0 litre car is powerful enough for all normal road use. Even driving a family around, anything above that is usually purchased for bragging rights or ego polishing. If someone wants to wave their dick in public, make 'em pay for it.
Although I could afford many of the pretentious cars currently available, I drive a 52 plate 1.6 Focus through choice, it's wonderful to drive. It seems that my values are some what in conflict with most in our must have society.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 22:21 GMT Matt
carbon nutral CO2???
4x4's should be banned?? get a life!
I own a 4x4 - a 2.8litre turbo diesel... in the past 4 months its been upto its hubs in mud every other week, during the floods it proved invaluable in passing through 3foot deep water... I often transport 6 passengers in lift sharing and I burn a high percentage of pure vegetable oil...
how does the pollution charging actualy work, do the cameras just see what car you have, and go on what it expects the vehicle to burn? so i get penalised for actively reducing my pollution footprint??
hell, if i had to pay £25 a day, Id bloody well make sure i was getting value for money... driving EVERYWHERE! or leaving the engine running all day with the climate control on so the car is always comfortable!!! :D
Tuesday 19th February 2008 22:44 GMT brian korn
The 914 platform is a great idea - lots of aftermarket options and components to put a modern air-cooled 911 engine in them. Get one while you can. Google for options to build out a damn fast car.
Tuesday 19th February 2008 22:45 GMT Paul Banacks
BORIS FOR MAYOR!
We need to get rid of Mayor "I hate cars" Ken.
Congestion is caused by having far too many traffic lights which stay RED on all exits and dividing the roads up into bus lanes. Then he smugly taxes us for it.
* VOTE BORIS FOR MAYOR - 2008 *
Wednesday 20th February 2008 02:10 GMT Curtis Simmons
Tax by displacement....stupid
Tax by displacement is stupid
Buick Lacrosse CXL city 17, highway 27 *3.8L engine.
Honda accord city 18, highway 26 *3.0L engine
Honda S2000 city 18, highway 24 *2.2L engine
VW passat city 19, highway 28 *2L turbocharged engine
Wednesday 20th February 2008 02:10 GMT Alex Threlfall
Tarred with the brush...
What I hate about the whole "4x4's are wrong" attitude we have at the moment, and I'm fed up of the w*nkers who keep leaving fake parking tickets on my 4x4 when it's parked on a main road. Yes, ticket the idiots a few doors down who have 4x4's as people carriers/chelsea tractors, but the vehicles like mine which are a) signwritten as a business vehicle, and b) obviously used for towing and off road shouldn't be tarred with the same brush. It just annoys me! Don't even get me started on the congestion charge, or the LEZ stuff which costs our company hundreds of pounds every time we need to take the truck into the greater london area.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 02:10 GMT Herbys
@Anonymous Coward
The paragraph you quote says "more than two", you say "you can fit two or more" which is not true. In most compact cars, fitting three4 children (with the appropriate child restraints, boosters or child seats) is extremely difficult, and in many cases not legal. And more than three is simply impossible.
And regarding the "big car" comment, I happen to love big cars, and need no excuses. I'm paying for the fuel, the normal taxes and the vehicle, and I'm a tall person with a big family that simply finds stupid being crammed in a tiny vehicle.
An artificial and absolutely disproportionate tax such as this will not have any significant impact on the world's climate, as a single cow has more warming impact than even the worst (modern and properly tuned) gas guzzler.
Stop telling other people how to live.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 08:33 GMT Toby Harman
Treat 4x4 as trucks
ok - So there are legitimate uses for 4x4's. Farmers etc etc.
They can't be registered at a metropolitan address.
They have a reduced speed limit as per trucks.
The police enforce this.
These allow people who genuinely have a need for them to drive them, but severely inconvenience the Porsche Cayenne owners out there!
You'd have to think about how you apply this - Maybe on a Kerb Weight basis? Over 2 tonnes and up you go? That would catch Rolls' as well, so there would have to be other criteria, such as being 4WD. That would also exclude the "light 4x4's" like the RAV4 and Subaru's, which is fine from my perspective.
That'll take a few of those Chelsea tractors off the road.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 08:33 GMT Tim Bates
Guess again...
"Just how fast can your Porsche go in a crowded London street?
Why have a six liter engine capable of enough acceleration to rip your eyeballs down your throat when you'll have to stop just a few yards later."
Try 3.6L or 3.8L. I think you might be confusing cylinders with litres. Or thinking of the Carerra GT (which is not common).
Only 3 Porsche models (I can think of) have an engine bigger than 3.8L:
Carerra GT (V10 - 5.7L)
928 (V8 - 4.5 to 5.4 depending on model)
917 race car which won't be on the roads in London anyway.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 08:36 GMT Eddie
Is keep your French Porsche in London and your English Porsche at your house in France. Save on parking fines, speeding tickets, road tax too. LOL.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 09:13 GMT Anonymous Coward
Big Porshe
The whole point about having a Porsche is to show how much money you have. Well what bigger display of excess consumption is there than throwing away £9000 per year (after personal taxation) Wow! Look what a big dick I've got!
Still Green Ken has a point.
I well remember mornings crossing the Strand at the Charring Cross pedestrian lights. First take a breath in the Charring Cross yard, not too deep now. Then hurry across the pavement, hoping there is no holdup, to the centre reservation then with a lunge over to the rear of St Martin's Church where you can at last take your next breath. Takes some timing I can tell you. And what did I pass on the Strand? Big red busses – lots. Black taxis – lots. White vans – nearly lots. Cars – some maybe. Porsches – "Er what's a Porsche". We all know what is polluting London, Ken.
Still Green Ken has a point; I suppose you have to start somewhere. And you need a big dick to own a Porsche. Not too many of those in the City these days.
I well remember mornings crossing the Strand at the Charring Cross pedestrian lights. First take a breath in the Charring Cross yard, not too deep now. Then hurry across the pavement, hoping there is no holdup, to the centre reservation then with a lunge over to the rear of St Martin's Church where you can at last take your next breath. Takes some timing I can tell you. And what did I pass on the Strand? Big red buses – lots. Black taxis – lots. White vans – nearly lots. Cars – some maybe. Porsches – "Er what's a Porsche". We all know what is polluting London, Ken.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 09:56 GMT Mark
@bygjohn
You're making up a false dichotomy, john. The choice isn't "ka" and "4x4", there are a lot more types of car. If high riding position is all that is needed, tell the manufacturers to make the 4x4 chassis but put a normal 1.4/1.6 engine in it, add regenerative braking and you've got a car that in urban does only a little worse than it does motorway.
And herbeys, Ken isn't telling you how to live your life, he's just taxing you, but STILL you complain...
Wednesday 20th February 2008 10:23 GMT James
The best thing about the Ken Livingstone and the congestion charge is the entertainment value you get from watching the wailing and moaning from the 'we're going to kill the planet / pedestrians / other drivers and don't give a fuck' brigade. I really like the way he *really* fucks off the Evening Standard, too.
A few facts:
- The congestion charge has reduced traffic levels by 20% since 2002.
- Travel times in Central London are about the same due to traffic calming measures.
- On the other hand pedestrian fatalities have fallen by **40%** (of course the 4X4 owners, by definition, don't give a fuck about this).
- Cycling in London is up 43%
- Any *Londoner* will tell you that the buses and tubes are have been immeasurably improved.
- Most *Londoners* (i.e. the people that live here) support the congestion charge since the majority of Londoners don't even own a car.
The timing of this announcement (three months before the mayoral election) is not an accident. The congestion charge is a vote winner with the people of London who don't own a 4X4 (say about 95%).
I look forward to the increased wailing and climate change denial.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 10:23 GMT bobbles31
"When diesels are as clean as petrol cars, i.e. active catalytic converters and soot filters, then you can lecture petrol drivers on the environment. Until then, as I drive round behind your stinking hulk, my petrol car is actually cleaning up after you."
My 2.2ctdi saloon car has a soot filter and an active catalyst. So please accept the lectures being given.
I don't need it, I've got climate control and don't have to pay the £25 charge.
What will the money be used for?
Will the money be used to make bus seats wider so that non-pygmies can have a comfortable seat without being squashed in or pushed off the seat be other passengers?
Will the money be used to make a fast, reliable, uncrowded, air conditioned, cheaper underground system?
Will the money be used to make more cycling lanes so that cyclists can do as they are told and cycle in them?
Will cycle lanes be more than 100-400 metres in length?
Will the buildings in London be cleaned so that they are not covered in black soot and crap like all of them are now?
Answer to all of the above is of course a resounding and exasperated NO from all those who know better than I do.
So what will the money from congestion charging go to?
The Olympics in 2012.
No, not the city, not the community, not the buildings, not cleaning up our filthy capital city, not the transport system.
The money will be spent on the building work for the Olympic grounds themselves - which have as you know got a current price tag of £40 billion.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 12:01 GMT Dan
Green eyed monsters
My my, the jealously has come out on this one!
The selfishness will be the thing that gets us in the end. Your inclination to think that it's ok because it doesn't affect you is precisely the thing that enables our corrupt hamfisted politicians to introduce all this crap legislation that is creeping ever forwards until we won't be able to fart without getting permission.
Good luck Porsche.
@Bryce Prewitt
It is not class hatred.
It is money for old rope - a business opportunity.
You see, these rich people that can afford to buy and run 4x4's and sports cars and 'Chelsea tractors' can and will drive into central London every day in them.
They can and will pay £25 per day to do this, or pay on days that it suits them to drive themselves anyway. That - or get the company to pay the charges.
No, they are not small companies, they are banks and equity corps etc.
All this is, is Ken being told and seeing himself an opportunity to wring more money out of London to pay for the Olympics.
Only question is, why did we want or need the Olympics (at a cost of £40 billion) in the first place?
Wednesday 20th February 2008 13:10 GMT Perpetual Cyclist
Don't worry, this problem will go away...
Oil again passed the symbolic price of $100/barrel yesterday. With the £ falling, that is a record UK price. The price of iron ore whet up 60% in one step yesterday. The price of wheat doubled in the last month. Gold is converging on $1000 an ounce. The world is bumping up against the global limits to growth. Western governments are quietly and systematically hyperinflating themselves out of total economic collapse. The rich will always be rich, but in a few years the middle classes will suddenly realise they are new poor. There will be a lot few Chelsea Tractors on the road, but most of them will still be in Chelsea.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 13:48 GMT Tony
A few facts? Hardly.
Travel times same due to traffic calming? The L in TfL is for "liars". Don't believe the propaganda. Check your facts. They don't match the TfL's biased interpretation.
Pedestrian fatalities are down - it has nothing to with congstion charge, its across London (not just CC land) due to intense focus on casualty reduction by police and councils (if you used public transport you'd have seen the ads). As for your other comment, grow up (are 12 year olds allowed on El Reg?). FACT - adults hit by 4x4's are less likely to die or suffer serious head injury. Statistical analysis of accidents has proven they are SAFER for adults. That's why well informed anti's don't mention accident rates anymore, just co2.
Cycling is up - so are cyclist casualty rates (congrtulations, the only group of road users with an increase). Handy hint - try observing the highway code - red is for danger and stop at traffic lights.
Any londoner? Improved immeasurably? How much did Ken pay you for that gem. I was born in london and commute 3 hours a day across town - they have not improved at all, just more crowded. You clearly don't use them.
Most Londoners support the congestion - really? I get the impression you're not a londoner, but the election will tell.
From your vitriolic comments my guess is that you are bike riding halfwit who jumps red lights and is a fully paid up cycling neo-nazi (intolerant views and violent hatred of those you disagree with, dodgy outfits and helmets - sounds familiar). Please don't delude yourself that your opinions are facts. You're not even very good at being an anti!
Paris as you don't have a clue!
Wednesday 20th February 2008 14:43 GMT Jack Moxley
Hangings not good enough for 233g/m2 +
Bloody human rights act, blocking my guilty free murdering rampage of the sloane ranger.
@Tony
Actually I'm a man with a van. You're right that I don't spend very much time on public transport because I spend all day every day driving around London.
It is ludicrous to suggest that 4X4s are safer for pedestrians. I am not an expert on road safety but the physics are very straightforward and rely on the conservation of momentum:
M1v1 = M2v2 . 2000kg car going at 10 m/s will send 100kg man flying at 200m/s.
A 1000kg car will send him flying at 100m/s. Which would you prefer to be hit by?
This is the same argument used by people to say that 4X4s are 'safer' (despite alarming propensity to roll). They are 'safer' because the survival of their occupants is in inverse proportion to survival of everybody (pedestrians included) else on the road.
You can't have it both ways.
Wednesday 20th February 2008 15:38 GMT Sleepy
Easy answer
Everone seems to have missed the easy answer - well it's easy for me anyway. Just don't go into London any more. Don't pay any congestion charge, don't work there, don't buy anything there. Leave Ken a ghost town to rule over.
Oh, and getting three small children into full-sized child seats can't be done in a current Vectra, the doors won't shut.
I congratulate you on your ignorance and prejudice overcoming your fundamental requirement to survive and reproduce! A Darwin Award is surely coming your way.
Traffic collisions between vehicles and pedestrians have little to do with momentum. Hit by a car at speed you hit the bonnet, your head smashes the windscreen and you fly in the air. Momentum only determines how high/far you fly. You then hit the road/kerb. What kills you is the dual impact of hitting the windscreen (very hard) with your head, followed by landing on head first on tarmac (even harder).
The long bonnets of 4x4's mean an adult will often hit their head on the bonnet, which being thin sheet metal have some give unlike a windscreen. As they are flat fronted you slump over the bonnet with internal injuries, before sliding off the bonnet onto the road. Thus you have much less severe impacts to the head and mainly internal trauma to the body, which are more survivable than 2 massive head traumas from a car (or van!) hit.
These are facts, proven by accident analysis. So Mr Van driver, if you "gave a f*ck" about other people you'd ditch the van and get a safe 4x4!
Which is more dangerous and polluting - a large 4x4 or a Mercedes van capable of over 100mph laden driven by one the highest risk occupations for vehicle insurance - Van Drivers! Statistically you are a lot more dangerous than any 4x4 - ask the insurance industry. Thanks for coming.
Thursday 21st February 2008 02:31 GMT bygjohn
"You're making up a false dichotomy, john. The choice isn't "ka" and "4x4", there are a lot more types of car."
Well, actually I wasn't making up a dichotomy at all, just giving a real-life example.
"If high riding position is all that is needed, tell the manufacturers to make the 4x4 chassis but put a normal 1.4/1.6 engine in it, add regenerative braking and you've got a car that in urban does only a little worse than it does motorway."
Actually, apart from the regenerative braking my RAV4 isn't far off this anyway - 2.0 engine isn't that much bigger than your proposed 1.6, which I suspect would have felt a tad sluggish after the 1.3 in my Ka considering the RAV is a bit bigger. And of course the RAV exists, your proposed car doesn't. Hey, it's actually a nice car too, which is also a factor. There's more to life than pure utility, unless you're into hair shirts etc.
My main reason for commenting here was to counter the notion that all 4x4s are enormous and gas-guzzling when plainly they aren't, as is shown by the number which aren't subject to the London charge when other non-4x4s are, and give an example of why someone would use one in an urban context.
Thursday 21st February 2008 08:54 GMT Seán
Surely someone can come up with a way of shutting down the unneeded cylinders while puttering through town. Then all the idiots who want cars which can do more than the speed limit or can ford rivers can cut their emissions to acceptable levels while in the congestion area. they'd still be able to get themselves a whole load of points outside the congestion area. I'm sure some acceptable system could be devised which would cost less than £50 a day.
Thursday 21st February 2008 11:42 GMT Anonymous Coward
@Sleepy
I agree - best suggestion.
Leaves more room for pedestrians and cyclists - who will continue the battle.
Thursday 21st February 2008 12:23 GMT Mark
"And of course the RAV exists, your proposed car doesn't. Hey, it's actually a nice car too, which is also a factor."
Well that's because nobody says "Can I have one" and the profit margins are better on this car so why bother changing when nobody is asking. Even if only a few people ask, why risk a profitable line?
With your RAV being taxed to buggery, sales will fall and they'll be looking for a new direction. And they'll have your request on line...
Wednesday 27th February 2008 22:25 GMT Gordon
OR....
Question is. How far as we going to take the argument "if you want it, and can afford it, why shouldn't you have it??".
I'm pretty sure Michael Ryan would have been against gun control!
Tuesday 4th March 2008 20:59 GMT Anonymous Coward
Well thats what you get
Besides its cheaper to drive your own car than take the bus..
Push the PB transpport price and force people into cars then nail them for driving a car... And before you are kicked out by the public take over the transport so you still have high paying job.
You must tell me who your master was where you trainined..
Quality!


Romina Bullan Photography — Bavarian Fall Festivity.
It's fall. It's that special atmosphere here in Munich. It's that time everyone is looking forward to and I've stepped out of my appartment for a photowalk. A photowalk to catch emotions people usually have when they are participating the so called "Wiesn". I've tried to capture mood and spirit in my photos to give you an idea how it feels to be there.
Images have been shot with a 50mm and 85mm prime lense.
← Asics - A shoot with running enthusiasts.


Question Of The Week: What Does The Fourth Of July Mean To You?
Bones Hooks sings: "Just A Touch Of Love, A Little Bit", and plans and intentions of things to come. Thanks for listening. Please share the show with friends, tell them about it. www.urbanshooter.libsyn.com for direct links.


Mccrea, John. George Washington Papers, Series 7, Applications for Office, -1796: John McCrea . to 1796, 1789. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mgw758479/.
McCrea, J. (1789) George Washington Papers, Series 7, Applications for Office, -1796: John McCrea . to 1796. [Manuscript/Mixed Material] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/mgw758479/.
Mccrea, John. George Washington Papers, Series 7, Applications for Office, -1796: John McCrea . to 1796, 1789. Manuscript/Mixed Material. Retrieved from the Library of Congress, <www.loc.gov/item/mgw758479/>.


Standard Bank car insurance is part of the short term section of a giant financial company.
Standard Bank is one of South Africa and Africa's leading banks.
It has operations in 32 countries around the world, including branches in Europe and South America besides operations in 20 African countries.
This bank was founded in 1862 in London has continued to grow and diversify its business. It now does investment banking besides personal and business banking.
Its insurance business is divided into two sections: Standard Bank Home Insurance and Standard Bank Car Insurance.
In the first category Standard Bank offers cover for the building, compensating you in case of damage to the structure. This category goes by the name of homeowners insurance.
The second kind of insurance offered by Standard Bank is household and vehicle insurance. This type of insurance covers the contents of a home and other valuable items. In addition to this it also covers motor vehicles.
Standard Bank vehicle insurance will see that you are compensated in case it gets damaged or stolen. Standard bank insurance is offered in partnership with South Africa's top insurance and assurance companies.
Comprehensive vehicle cover offers you many benefits. If you get involved in an accident and other people are injured or suffer loss as a result, you will not have to pay them. Your cover will take care of such expenses.
If your vehicle is damaged in an accident Standard Bank car insurance will take care of the repairs. Should fire cause damage to your car you will be compensated if you have this cover.
Comprehensive insurance also covers you in case your car gets stolen. When asking for car insurance quotes it is wise to know exactly what the insurance policy covers.
Comprehensive cover is always recommended although the premiums are a bit higher than those of other kinds of limited cover. This is because it covers the most kind of risks. It is not just a matter of getting cheap motor car insurance.
In case your car breaks down because some components are not working properly, you will receive compensation if you have this cover. The cost of towing the vehicle to the nearest repairer is also taken care of by Standard Bank car insurance.
Should your car break down far from your home the mechanical breakdown cover will pay for your stay in a hotel. And for the time that you are unable to use your car you will be given a car hire vehicle to facilitate your movement.
You can find out more about Standard Bank car insurance covers from Standard Bank insurance brokers or looking up Standard Bank insurance online. Once you log onto the Standard Bank online banking website you will find contact details which you can call to get a Standard Bank insurance quote.


Three additional companies are now offering garments and products made from 100% Australian cotton. The products are labelled with the 'Australian Cotton Mark' swing-tag that presents positives messages about Australia's world-leading cotton industry. Each Australian cotton garment carries a swing-tag featuring our logo, key messages, and promotion.


The Visual Cryptogram 2 (VC2) was created by VISA in 2005 to protect against online fraud. The VC2 code is the three-digit number printed at the back of your credit card. The rationale of VC2 is that to access this code, you need to have the card insight. I always thought that the rationales to print it at the back was to avoid camera capture used with card skimmers (see for instance http://www.darknet.o … ut-atm-hacking-tips/).
This entry was posted in Products, Social engineering by wunderbarb. Bookmark the permalink.


text:
Fitchburg man stable after Wednesday night crash
By Alana Melanson | amelanson@lowellsun.com | Lowell Sun
PUBLISHED: October 4, 2013 at 12:00 a.m. | UPDATED: July 11, 2019 at 12:00 a.m.
FITCHBURG — A 29-year-old Fitchburg man was in stable condition Thursday after he was flown by medical helicopter to UMass Medical Center in Worcester late Wednesday night with what are being called severe injuries sustained in a motor-vehicle accident on Rollstone Road.
According to Worcester District Attorney Joseph D. Early Jr. spokesman Paul Jarvey, Nathan Bryce, 29, of 101 Bridle Cross Road, was driving southbound near 540 Rollstone Road at about 11:30 p.m. when his 1997 GMC Sierra pickup truck left the road and struck trees on the southbound side.
According to Fitchburg Deputy Fire Chief Tom Dateo, the vehicle rolled over fully, landing upright. He said rescue crews had to pry open the door to remove the victim. Bryce was brought by ambulance to HealthAlliance Hospital in Leominster, where he was sent to UMass Medical Center by medical helicopter, Dateo said.
Jarvey said there did not appear to be any passengers in the vehicle.
Dateo said emergency personnel told him the man suffered a fractured right femur, but did not have any further information about the man's injuries.
As of 4 p.m. Thursday, Bryce was in stable condition, according to a UMass nursing supervisor.
Follow Alana Melanson at facebook.com/alanasentinel or on Twitter @alanamelanson.
Alana Melanson | Multimedia journalist
Alana Melanson is a reporter who has been covering all things Chelmsford since September 2014. Before that, she spent three years covering Fitchburg at The Sun's sister paper, the Sentinel & Enterprise. A Worcester-area native and graduate of UMass Amherst, Alana enjoys live music and making jewelry.
amelanson@lowellsun.com
Follow Alana Melanson @AlanaMelanson