Uk sets out on a path to eliminate private ownership of cars for citizens?

[sayak83]

Did you even read the article???



Snippet: Government Transport Minister Trudy Harrison recently spoke at a mobility conference, addressing the future of personal mobility. In her comments, she said it was necessary to ditch the "20th-century thinking centred around private vehicle ownership and towards greater flexibility, with personal choice and low carbon shared transport."

Because it's the ultimate end goal by doing so.

The mentality is there.

I support that policy. Not by coercion, but by inducement.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I thought Britain was kind of pitiful,
when I was there, with its trappings of empire
reduced to theme park attractions for tourists.

I had to try fish n chips.

Got some from a place ( staffed by Filipinos)
who were pleased when i said " salamat po".
That was before i tried it.
I threw it away.

Well if you ever return, I'd be happy to recommend a proper chippy.

I wouldn't go to Hong Kong and and visit a noodle bar staffed by Germans btw. That should have been a giveaway.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Let me know as soon as they start banning air to breathe.

Banning it or rendering it unbreathable, amounts to much the same thing.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Oh yeah I heard of that as well, it seems like the premise is to outprice people out of their cars and force them onto public transportation systems.

Eventually I would think the ultimate goal is to go to pre Henry Ford days where everybody has to walk or take a coach everywhere, and the only one driving the cars will only be the super wealthy and elite.

The Democrat ideal of progress I suppose.

That's one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is rolling back the subsidies we provide to car users a bit.

 

[Twilight Hue]

News to me but an interesting read,not sure how this could work though,public transport isn’t any use for many people.

That's what I've been hearing. Public transport is a joke.

Same as here in the states.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I can see that reasoning and it has some sense to it.

But does it justify what Trudy Harrison said?

The two things don't have much to do with each other. I'm not even sure if the UK typically has minimum parking requirements.

There's been a shift in the philosophy behind transportation planning in the last few decades: instead of focusing on moving cars and trucks around (with the hope that this will indirectly allow people and goods to move around), the focus is now directly on moving people and goods. Sometimes this movement will involve cars and trucks, sometimes it won't, but will never only involve cars.

Societally, the change is mostly about economic factors and not so much about government control. Mobility as a service, for instance, is being mostly driven by the private sector. Generally, the government is only involved because they're the ones operating a lot of the transportation services (e.g. transit buses and commuter rail lines) that a MaaS venture would want to include in their offering.

... but what Trudy Harrison said is right. The last few decades have taught us that auto-centric transportation and land use policies produce bad outcomes across the board: when you make auto travel the only option to get around, you saddle yourself with ridiculously large infrastructure costs, so you either have to have high taxes or do without other valuable services. You also create cities that aren't that pleasant to live or work in. And you don't even really accommodate drivers, because induced demand kills the benefit of trying to accommodate drivers.

I'm a transportation engineer. I've done the studies that consider how a commuting corridor functions when you increase non-auto mode share: transit ridership, cycling, walking, etc. - all else being equal, things get better for the drivers. If you're dead set on driving to work, wouldn't you want as much of the traffic that's currently slowing you down on your commute have other options that are attractive enough to them that they'll get out of your way?

 

[Audie]

Well if you ever return, I'd be happy to recommend a proper chippy.

I wouldn't go to Hong Kong and and visit a noodle bar staffed by Germans btw. That should have been a giveaway.

Theres one inTrafalger square tha's good.

Hk is such a paradise for " foodies".

Ive eaten fabulous Filioino food in Manila,
but those guys were not up to doing fish n chips.

Pollock with, oh, never mind.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That's what I've been hearing. Public transport is a joke.

Same as here in the states.

Depends on the region. Public transit works just fine in many cities.

It generally needs a critical mass, though: once it's good enough that wealthier professionals take it, the state of public transit gets way more political attention, which gets it more funding, which makes it way better, etc., etc.

 

[RestlessSoul]

That's what I've been hearing. Public transport is a joke.

Same as here in the states.

Public transport in London is excellent. It was in NYC too, when I was there a few years ago. Increased reliance on public transport, walking and cycling, and less use of private cars, is the future for large cities.

Obviously it's a different story when your nearest grocery store is 3 miles from your house.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Theres one inTrafalger square tha's good.

Hk is such a paradise for " foodies".

Ive eaten fabulous Filioino food in Manila,
but those guys were not up to doing fish n chips.

Pollock with, oh, never mind.

We Brits are not exactly known for our cuisine tbf. Most of the best restaurants in London are Indian, Chinese or Italian owned.

 

[England my lionheart]

That's what I've been hearing. Public transport is a joke.

Same as here in the states.

unless your in a city public transport is a pain and unreliable but you have to use it in London as the parking fees are horrendous and if you park on a meter you cannot just add money for another two hours you have to move to another spot.

Outside of London I never use public transport,my car is my lifeline lol.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well if you ever return, I'd be happy to recommend a proper chippy.

I wouldn't go to Hong Kong and and visit a noodle bar staffed by Germans btw. That should have been a giveaway.

In DC once, I saw a German Chinese food vendor.
(Or was it a Chinese German food vendor? Memory fades.)
It bought to life the old joke about it....
After eating it, an hour later you're hungry for power.

 

[F1fan]

Did you even read the article???



Snippet: Government Transport Minister Trudy Harrison recently spoke at a mobility conference, addressing the future of personal mobility. In her comments, she said it was necessary to ditch the "20th-century thinking centred around private vehicle ownership and towards greater flexibility, with personal choice and low carbon shared transport."

Because it's the ultimate end goal by doing so.

The mentality is there.

I'm more concerned about the mentality of misrepresentation and disinformation than voluntary efforts to make society more efficient and safer.

 

[Audie]

We Brits are not exactly known for our cuisine tbf. Most of the best restaurants in London are Indian, Chinese or Italian owned.

Famously not known for.

But who cares.

I dont suppose, if like we invited your guys to
dinner, you might come back for another
150 years or so?

 

[F1fan]

The threat to car use you should probably be most worried about actually comes from an increase in freedom and a reduction in government interference: elimination of parking minimums.

More and more, cities are getting rid of minimum parking requirements in their zoning by-laws/ordinances. Increasingly, property owners are being allowed to provide whatever amount of parking they see fit instead of having to provide some minimum amount set out by law based on their development's size and intended use.

... and a lot of developers in these areas are choosing to drastically reduce how much parking they provide, or not provide parking at all.

A lot of high density areas see land as money makers, because there's more demand for housing. Parking doesn't make much money. If they have to build multi-level parking then it costs that much more. There has to be a balanced solution.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I'm more concerned about the mentality of misrepresentation and disinformation than voluntary efforts to make society more efficient and safer.

I fear with technology, it's only going to become so bad, telling truth from fiction will be almost impossible.

Worthy of its own thread maybe.

 

[F1fan]

That's what I've been hearing. Public transport is a joke.

Same as here in the states.

Well you can drive around in your car for 30 minutes looking for a parking spot as if that isn't a funnier joke.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

From the link:

"If you think this plan is limited to just the UK, you haven’t been paying attention. There have been other efforts to make private vehicle ownership a thing of the past, including a new measure in Southern California. The 2021 Regional Transportation Plan passed recently by the San Diego Association of Government’s board of directors is a $160 billion initiative just for the metropolitan area to boost public transportation.

That’s a hefty price tag for such a small area, so one of the ways officials have been planning to fund it is by levying a per-mile driving tax against citizens. That was such an unpopular move it was shelved, for now. But I have a funny feeling that driving tax is going to be revisited. Critics say that and other fines, fees, etc. are designed to nuke personal vehicle ownership for all but the wealthy."


"Such a small area?"

I would venture to guess dear writer has never driven SoCal freeways during rush hour.

There have been "driving taxes" for ages: they're called gas taxes.

The issue that's cropped up recently is that with the increase in hybrid and electric vehicles, gas consumption is getting to be less and less of a good proxy for distance driven.

One suggested change to address this is to move the taxes from gasoline to insurance (and, as much as possible, base what you pay in insurance on what you actually drive instead of your estimate of how much you plan to drive).

 

[F1fan]

I fear with technology, it's only going to become so bad, telling truth from fiction will be almost impossible.

Worthy of its own thread maybe.

Technology is a tool, and tools are only as safe and reliable as those who use them. Personal responsibility!!! If you use faulty tools, that's on the user. Be smart, use reliable tools (yes I'm talking about news and social media).

 

[F1fan]

There have been "driving taxes" for ages: they're called gas taxes.

The issue that's cropped up recently is that with the increase in hybrid and electric vehicles, gas consumption is getting to be less and less of a good proxy for distance driven.

One suggested change to address this is to move the taxes from gasoline to insurance (and, as much as possible, base what you pay in insurance on what you actually drive instead of your estimate of how much you plan to drive).

That's not a bad idea. The more a person drives the more at risk they are. Insurance should reflect that.