“Touch my car again & I’ll run you over”: Taxi driver blocking cycle lane tells cyclist; Tory MP argues cycling spending shouldn’t be government priority; Our fan mail; Kaitlin Armstrong trial date set; UK’s busiest cycle crossing? + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
"Who pays road tax? [Five-year-old] Cyclist or motorist?": More of our fan mail
In the good ol’ days I’m sure these would land at road.cc Towers scribbled across the back of an empty pack of smokes…
Since we reported on the ‘debate’ surrounding the viral video of a driver continuing through a narrowing as a five-year-old cyclist rode towards him we’ve heard views from almost every possible angle: those, like journalist Mike Parry, who think the motorist should have stopped out of basic human compassion and it’s irrelevant whether the child should have been on the road. Those, like Tory politicians Baroness Foster and Susan Hall, who (predictably) think the kid had no place on the road. And we’ve also heard just about every possible viewpoint in between.
And so we arrive at our email inbox, refreshed and keen for another day of cycling news…
Whilst all the arguments point to the motorist being in the wrong. WHO PAYS ROAD TAX …..CYCLIST OR MOTORIST.
Surely if cyclists are given rights of way then they should contribute by paying road tax…
It’s those terrible kids again… not paying their taxes…
Maybe we’ll get something constructive out of this next one…(*wishful thinking klaxon*)
Parent totally wrong to allow child on road.A busy road is not a nursery.Clearly the father is an attention seeker filming his son so he can be on TV.What an irresponsible WOKE.
Yes the driver should have stopped.And got out of his vehicle and taken child and bike off rd and called the police.
I’m starting to think someone’s got more than one email address… anyway, that was just a bit of ‘fun’ for your Thursday morning, we won’t feed the troll(s) again… strange the sheer anger at a five-year-old child riding a bicycle…
John Lewis doing a Christmas ad about cycling?
It’s the things we do that mean the most. 🛹 #TheBeginner pic.twitter.com/pdtwAcaBDu
— John Lewis & Partners (@JohnLewisRetail) November 10, 2022
We saw the helmet, our heart skipped a beat, eyes widened… oh, never mind, it’s about skateboarding…
UK's busiest cycle crossing?
Is this the busiest cycle crossing in the UK? pic.twitter.com/Lqs05rdb5v
— Sam 🚴🌱🍻Ⓥ (@MCRCycleSam) November 10, 2022
road.cc Simon’s encyclopedic knowledge of London informs me this one is on Embankment just west of Blackfriars Bridge, and the “key thing is that it is part of the set up where the two most popular routes in London meet — the EW Cycleway, which continues under the bridge, and NS which goes over the bridge and on towards Ludgate Circus.”
“But vid was shot on north side of Embankment just to right of ‘A1211’ on the map, people switching NS-EW or vice-versa go up/down the bit marked ‘Victoria Embankment’.
“Whether continuing eastbound along river or switching to NS though you have to cross the traffic lanes there (as EW switches from S side to N) compliance with traffic lights by cyclists is near as dammit 100 per cent.
“Classic example of ‘build it and they will come’…(Much misquoted … it’s actually, ‘If you build it, he will come’)…”
Conservative MP Kit Malthouse argues "lovely" cycling spending shouldn't be priority
EDIT: It’s been a long month in politics… as rightly pointed out in the comments Malthouse is no longer Education Secretary and was replaced by Gillian Keegan.
Thanks to road.cc reader Richard for the heads up about former Education Secretary Kit Malthouse’s comments in an interview with Andrew Marr on his Tuesday evening LBC radio show, during which he suggested “lovely though they might be”… cycling and walking projects “might have to go in the face of other, more pressing priorities”.
Discussing next week’s Budget announcement, unsurprisingly the former education minister Malthouse was keen to point out he wants more money going into schools and suggested active travel policies may need to make way…
“I heard a minister say the government was going to spend £9.9 billion on cycling and walking initiatives over the next few years,” he told Marr. “That seemed, to me, not a great trade when schools are struggling […] Cycling and walking, I’m afraid, lovely though they might be, and I was a cyclist myself for many years, might have to go in the face of other, more pressing priorities.”
Kit had me worried for a second there that we weren’t going to hear the “I was a cyclist myself” line…
It wasn’t just cycling though, we should point out, with Malthouse suggesting business subsidies, Ministry of Defence spending and “quite a lot of areas” where spending could be tightened or ideally passed over to education.
Thoughts?
How to wax(wing) a chain...
Came back to my bike to find a bird on my chain. They did not want to leave my bike pic.twitter.com/IyWxJ5Hkyb
— Austin Whitehead (@maustinw) November 9, 2022
The replies are saying it’s a waxwing so let’s run with that…
Christmas gifts for cyclists 2022 — 20 money-no-object gifts for the cyclist in your life
It’s that time of year, folks – time for us to suggest some great Christmas gifts for cyclists, and if you really want to shell out, we’ve got some money-no-object ideas…
From a new pair of shades to… well, a whole new bike… here’s what to buy the cyclist in your life if you happen to have won the lottery this year… (spoiler alert: it’s not a ‘I love cycling’ mug with a punny caption)…
> Christmas gifts for cyclists 2022 — 20 money-no-object gifts for the cyclist in your life
Kaitlin Armstrong trial date set
The murder trial of Kaitlin Armstrong has been set for next June following a judge dismissing two motions filed by the accused’s defence team to stop certain evidence being used. The trial had been due to start last month but was delayed whilst judge Brenda Kennedy came to a decision on the motions. Kennedy concluded: “There was no evidence of any intentional disregard for the truth”.
Armstrong’s legal team had suggested some evidence should not be heard due to “factual errors” and “incorrect assertions” in the original affidavit, something the prosecutors now acknowledge too, but Kennedy decided the errors were unintentional and can be heard when the trial commences in June 2023.
Armstrong will stand trial having been charged with first-degree murder in connection with the shooting of gravel cyclist Moriah Wilson in Texas in May.
The New Yorker took a deep dive into events so far… and when I say ‘deep’ I mean ‘go make a brew and take half an hour out of your day deep’… just the 8,500 words…but as comprehensive a look at what we know as you could wish to read…
Trentin approves
What a great thing https://t.co/d85n7DMTfh
— Matteo Trentin (@MATTEOTRENTIN) November 10, 2022
"Worst dating app photo of all time"
worst dating app photo of all time pic.twitter.com/6lHUatR07y
— David O’Doherty (@phlaimeaux) November 10, 2022
Ryan reliably informs me David O’Doherty is also doing Celebrity Mastermind this weekend, specialist subject the Tour de France. Superb stuff.
“Col de l’Iseran and Col du Galibier are famous examples of a Tour de France mountain (_____)?”
“Pass… no wait, I meant pass, not pass…”
👀
It’s funny because it’s accurate #cycling pic.twitter.com/EVrO8hu6nq
— mistress of hellvetica (@sexandtheswiss) November 10, 2022
That last one is ‘All our club rides are Zone 6 at 5am’ …
"Touch my car again & I'll run you over": Taxi driver blocking cycle lane tells cyclist
This one intially came to our attention last week, but we’ve sat on it since then as the cyclist’s footage of a separate incident (possibly coming to road.cc soon too) was subject to a court date and neither of us wanted to jeopardise the chance of getting a decent result, so their Twitter account went private.
Ultimately that case resulted in penalty points and a €300 fine despite the driver’s solicitor’s best attempts to suggest the experienced cyclist shouldn’t have been on the road during rush hour.
Anyway, after that scene setting, here we are with this second incident…
Just a gentle knuckle tap and a hand gesture to push out of the bike lane brought out the very best in this professional driver. Corks finest. @IrishCycle @anneramsey740 @ShaneHoganD16 @conndonovan9 pic.twitter.com/YbTyDu9HSu
— Righttobikeit❤️Ukraine (@righttobikeit) November 2, 2022
Explaining it to road.cc, righttobikeit told us: “1. I was only alerting the driver he’d drifted into the bike lane. I wasn’t that miffed about it
“2. I didn’t stop to argue with him, I stopped because the BMW was worse and I couldn’t pass which let to the confrontation
“3. I came back out of the bike lane (due to flooding/debris partially due to storm near mostly like that all the time) near the sharp bend ahead so I can maintain speed. I usually come out later but I figured the guy behind would box me in.”
The shocking tap on their metal box had an enraging effect on the driver who, despite being calmly asked to move off the cycle lane, responded: “If you touch my car again I’ll run you over”.
Following another touch… “I’ll give you a kick up the […] you hit my car […] I let a bus come up this way […] you do that again I’ll get out and I’ll knock your head in, I’ll knock your head in… I am threatening you. Get my number and go to the Garda…”
The events at the next red light speak for themself…
10 November 2022, 09:12
10 November 2022, 09:12
10 November 2022, 09:12
10 November 2022, 09:12
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
93 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@Smoggysteve Right - as I say, though - that's a separate debate, that I'll leave to others.
AS I read this, I was wondering hao many other legal e-bikes may have been seized and crushed as a result of this bogus test? As I pointed out recently in a reply to a Facebook post that stated that e-bikes are limited to 25kph/15.5mph any bike, whether a pure pedal cycle or an e-bike, can exceed this speed if the rider can pedal hard enough, or when going downhill. The regulation just states that the motor must switch off at higher speeds. If the rider can achieve higher speeds unaided, that is legal. The test that the police used just demonstrated the maximum "speed" achieved by pedal power alone with no or little resistance can be much higher than the motor cut-off speed.
@ROOTminus1 Unfortunately, people will still do all they can to get past. the MGIFs can't help themselves and are a danger to everyone not only the cyclist.
It was going to weigh them up, but they were below the limit.
Clearly driver training and the driving test need to change to meet modern time poor driving conditions. I suggest the following need to be added to the practical test : 1) Undertaking on pavements. 2) Close passing cyclists or horses at 50mph.(It is clear from the comments on this website that cyclists do not appreciate how difficult a skill this is to master). 3) Threading between bollards to park on pavements near fast food outlets. 4) Steering with the knees while using a mobile phone and eating a burger or sushi, depending on the area. 5) Fighting with cyclists at roundabouts. For the advanced driving test the fighting will be with gangs of Hell's Angels or Mods. 6) Handbrake turns. 7) Driving at speed after all night parties. 8) Selecting the wrong gear and smashing into somebody's living room. The theory test could be shortened to make room for these practical additions. Maybe it could just be distilled down to learning crucial phrases like : "The cyclist came out of nowhere!" "I had the children in the car." "I had hunger knock and urgently needed an egg Mcmuffin." "I didn't see them." "I had been to a party and was wearing different shoes."
The headline states the article will "weigh up the pros and cons" but doesn't really provide any argument for keeping the limit. Or maybe it's to "weigh up the pros (of lowering the limit) and cons (of keeping the limit)"? Beyond having a different limit for either/or women's races/smaller riders, which I can see a strong argument for, I don't really see the point of just lowering the absolute limit. What will it achieve? We'll end up with aero bikes at the new limit but instead of costing £10-15k, it'll be £15-20k and we'll still hear more complaining about everything in the bike industry being so expensive. Sure, no one's forced to buy the TdF bike, but it does anchor the price ceiling, which will have an effect on every other model. There's a focus in the article on companies being able to make lightweight bikes again, or for pros to race on them. Well, they already exist for those that want them. And the pros? We might have a few years of bike choice, but we'll still end up with everyone using the aero bike at the new weight limit but with lots of expensive R&D and new materials that need to be paid for. Especially lightweight bikes don't have a right to exist. A 7kg bike from 20 years ago is the same weight as a 7kg bike today. I think what's more interesting is the suggestion of scaling the weight limit with rider weight. That feels fairer. But could it remove an advantage that a bigger sprinter might have over their colleagues, for example? We could end up with just the same style of rider across a whole race. It also feels like it doesnt make much sense to just map the men's limit onto the women's field. But then if it's an arbitrary limit, does that matter either?
FFS France always seemed like a safe place to ride a bike, outside Paris that is. Can't see the Department number in the photo - hire cars traditionally have been registered in Oise (60) and many still are, though not all. Does make you wonder if it was a Brit on holiday. Only road rage driver I've experienced in Spain was in a hire car, and that was relatively benign - brake check and windscreen wiper / fluid squirt.
Good idea! It's still here on YouTube: https://youtu.be/vgC4HnpW8Ns?is=yBeUq91LrYRbA9-C FF to 2:30 sorry I never got around to editing it down. May still be set to private due to the police 'investigation' but you can view it with the link. Bus one is here, again FF to 2:00: https://youtu.be/_AEHH4kl5Rs?is=wfwc4gZVW2UFp1x7
@Smoggysteve I ran the numbers (because I'm a geek like that) and with a 5mph difference in speed, the car driver would need to see approximately 120 meters of clear road ahead before considering an overtaking manoeuvre of a 15mph cyclist in a 20 zone, and that doesn't account for the delay in the car accelerating from speed-matching to overtaking at the limit. If the cyclist was actually doing nearer 17mph (because the instructor was exaggerating the "slowness" of the cyclist) then the car would require more than 200 meters of clear road before attempting to overtake. Those kind of gaps aren't rare, but they're certainly not all that common either. Uncommon enough that overtaking should NOT be first instinct for the driver in that situation, but would be obvious if a suitable opportunity is missed.
Daniel Smith demonstrates the overwhelming motonormativity in society, and his attitude stinks. He's probably capable of teaching people to pass their test, otherwise he'd be out of business, but he doesn't teach people to be tolerant of other road users, which in turn generates contempt and the likelihood of drivers translating that into driving dangerously around cyclists. Nothing demonstrates his appalling attitude better than the fact he chose to post this embarrassingly awful video himself, as if he thinks it shows his teaching skills.
93 thoughts on ““Touch my car again & I’ll run you over”: Taxi driver blocking cycle lane tells cyclist; Tory MP argues cycling spending shouldn’t be government priority; Our fan mail; Kaitlin Armstrong trial date set; UK’s busiest cycle crossing? + more on the live blog”
If there’s one thing I’ve
If there’s one thing I’ve learned from the posts on Next Door in my area which has several LTNs, it’s that They Walk Among Us.
They Drive Among Us (on their
They Drive Among Us (on their phones, for 200 yards, then park on the pavement)
If you ever want to see entitled driving, stand outside a primary school gates at the start and end of the school day.
the little onion wrote:
My daughter’s primary school (in London, so everyone lives within half a mile) puts big yellow barriers across the roads at drop-off/pick-up times, with signs and flashing lights advising that the road is closed. Parents in cars mount the pavement to get round them, presumably to save their kids from a walk of no more than 50m to the gates.
Brauchsel wrote:
My daughter’s primary school (in London, so everyone lives within half a mile) puts big yellow barriers across the roads at drop-off/pick-up times, with signs and flashing lights advising that the road is closed. Parents in cars mount the pavement to get round them, presumably to save their kids from a walk of no more than 50m to the gates.
— the little onionIt’s notable just how much traffic evaporates at half-term
Brauchsel wrote:
My daughter’s primary school (in London, so everyone lives within half a mile) puts big yellow barriers across the roads at drop-off/pick-up times, with signs and flashing lights advising that the road is closed. Parents in cars mount the pavement to get round them, presumably to save their kids from a walk of no more than 50m to the gates.
— the little onion
sounds like a good chance to stand filming them breaking the law, and filing with the police.
the little onion wrote:
Whilst walking back from my local shop on Monday, I saw a driver playing with a phone in a Range Rover, which was third in line at a traffic light. I called “Oi!” (oratory skills turned up to 11) and made a gesture to get her to put the phone down. She shook her head and mouthed “I’m on the phone” (I lip read so I’m confident that’s what it was).
Too busy on the phone to put the phone down. At that point I disappeared in a logic vortex.
It’s curious that there’s
It’s curious that there’s never any attempt at denial, they are go for justification, a dead end.
the little onion wrote:
I don’t need to stand outside the gates; I cycle the kids to primary school on a Tern GSD.
This is made much harder than it should be due to parallel parking along the road that the school is on. We get stuck in the traffic as the road isn’t really wide enough for parallel parking and two-way flow of motor vehicles.
Many parents have come up to me to ask about the GSD, commenting that it looks like a great idea. We’re still the only people (four form entry) who ride to school. This is in a London school with a maximum distance offered of less than 2 miles.
srchar wrote:
No, they drive among us. These idiots don’t do active travel.
You know what they say about
You know what they say about getting between a lioness and its cub? This is the same deal – standing between a motorist and their self-entitlement.
All these drivers arguing
All these drivers arguing that the child shouldn’t be there as if that makes a difference…
Do we deliberately endanger anyone breaking the rules of the road? If someone is speeding should I crash into them with my car? If a car is parked on the pavement do I find the driver “just popping into” the shop and punch them?
It doesn’t matter at all whether or not the child should be there. The driver would be in the wrong even if every frothing gammon on twitter was right and it was an imprisonable offence to take a child cycling on the road.
very much this
very much this
the classic is the punishment pass, the people who seem to believe they have a responisbility to enforce the (often made up) rules of the road, and to punish (judge, jury, jailer and even executioner) for any (as they see it) misdemanour.
I reckon it wasn’t punishment
I reckon it wasn’t punishment, just simple impatience – check out how close the driver was to hitting the car on the other side – quite a risk. Ask the driver and it will be a “What’s your problem, I missed them by plenty.”
Patrick9-32 wrote:
Other satisfying solutions are available. It may require some gym time that wouldn’t help your cycling any, though.
If I ever have a science experiment go wrong in just the right way and get super strength, I’ll be doing this full time. Sponsor me to spend a week in your city.
If you check out the “Cars in
If you check out the “Cars in houses” thread you’ll see that either this guy is going round the country in hi-vis practicing his craft unseen like a ninja, or this is unnecessary as vehicles are spontaneously upending themselves with no input by drivers, all the time.
End-stage capitalism – your
End-stage capitalism – your child isn’t paying to use that road and so has no place being there.
That John Lewis advert hit me
That John Lewis advert hit me right in the feels
Clearly Kim “I was a cyclist”
Clearly Kim “I was a cyclist” Malthouse doesn’t read the government’s own reports, which have estimated that the returns on cycling infrastructure investment range between £2 for every £ spent and a staggering £35 per £ spent. In the Netherlands it has been estimated that the €500M p.a. they spend on cycling infra returns €19bn in healthcare savings alone. This is something the cycling lobby doesn’t push enough, in my opinion, the fact that investment in cycling isn’t just “something nice”, it actually provides a positive return.
Couldn’t they just put Dido
Couldn’t they just put Dido Harding in charge of it, and then it would be world-leading investment instead of outrageously costly spending on the tofu eating wokerati?
… as opposed to motor infra
… as opposed to motor infra and driving – which are apparently a net cost to the economy (if you track all the costs – see “externalities of motoring”, something we’re really not keen on estimating).
There’s nothing wrong with deciding – like e.g. schools – that something is worth paying for of course. However our litany of “we need motoring to pay the bills” is a stumbling block to facing up to reality – the first step to change. Unless the bills we’re talking about are those from all the people who make money from the motor industry – and their political beneficiaries…
Oddly enough you’d think that e.g. kids being able to get themselves to school (and being healthier / having better well-being as a result of it) might be worth some cash? That doesn’t appear on Kit’s balance sheet most likely though…
Quote:
such as making sure that our Govt’s friends and relations and business contacts are all very well remunerated…?
Rendel Harris wrote:
— Rendel HarrisOh, we do, it’s just that the media point blank refuse to report it. Like when NICE said that the best way of tackling the obesity crisis would be if the government hit its cycling targets. Or the BBC R4 prog “Inside Health” which has been on for many years and, despite some doctors calling cycling the magic bullet for health, has mentioned cycling a couple of times, but only in passing. The BBC is obsessed with diet, and I’ve literally lost count of the number of items I’ve seen/heard about how improving your diet will make you healthy, but I’ve never seen/heard anything about how good cycling is for your health.
When I heard the Andrew Mar interview with Malthouse, I immediately emailed him, pointing out the incredible health benefits of a switch from driving to cycling, and the staggering ROI, but nothing was said. I also asked him why the media won’t cover the benefits, but no answer to that either.
Car in at local garage so I
Car in at local garage so I walk up to our meet point along a country lane.
https://goo.gl/maps/GDZXw88a8sCrHd3VA
The verges are slippery mud, and lots of people walk along this road, which is straight so I am walking towards traffic. It would be an Audi Q7 that appears ahead, at the point I can hear cars coming up behind. The road is narrow so cars normally can pass but have to slow. Anyway, I do a quick look at the verge and decide I am not going to step out of the way because there is a reasonable chance of falling over and the car would still be skimming past me so carry on walking. The Audi driver slows but my spidey senses tell me this is not a driver who is going to stop. I stop walking but hold my ground as he gets uncomfortably close without stopping. Two cars pass from behind and the Audi darts forward, leaving barely a foot between me and his door mirror*. I do my customary shout of “Oi!” and predictably, the car that couldn’t hold back for 2 seconds to make a safe pass slams on the brakes, reversing lights come on. I scoot across the road as I am not sure that he isn’t going to drive at me.
So anyway, down goes the window. “What the fuck do you think you are doing you fucking idiot.” “T,t,t, two metres” “What the fuck are you on about?” “You’re supposed to leave two metres” “Fuck off” “Read the fucking highway code.” At this point, his fist goes up and he attempts to hit me – not very well thought out given he was seated in a car but I step back. At this point a variety of wheeled traffic arrived and he drove off to the sound of “BJP 9” ringing in his ears. Why is it 75 year old Gammons feel so entitled?
Reported to the police as threatening behaviour. No doubt it will not go far without witnesses, but hopefully the police will speak to him and point out that a pedestrian has a right of way on the highway, is not required to slip around on mud to ease the passage of motorist sat in comfort, and raising fists at strangers is a very foolish thing to do. Hopefully, it will go on his file.
Just another lesson in my “Just remember, it is not cyclists that are the problem” series.
*Other types of mirror are available.
Quote:
‘Twas ever so…
I haven’t thrown a pinch in
I haven’t thrown a pinch in forty years And It shouldn’t ever come down to to who will win at fisticuffs, but I found myself willing you to take on Audi Grandad.
I know it’s hard to keep up
I know it’s hard to keep up these days, but Malthouse isn’t a minister anymore
?My bad. Updated now…
?My bad. Updated now…
Bobonabike wrote:
He’s trying to keep his profile up so that when the next minister resigns next week, he’ll be an obvious substitute.
eburtthebike wrote:
I hope someone produces a minister advent calendar. Each day you get to open a new revolving door, but instead of a bit of chocolate or gift, it’s a small piece of poop.
Kit Malthouse echoes the
Kit Malthouse echoes the increasingly bizarre and detached cherry picking that is Tory policy. We have an enduring climate emergency. We have a serious cost of living crisis. Want to cut emissions, get on your bike instead of your car. Want to put money back in your pocket? Get on your bike instead of in your car. Bikes are a centuries old invention and the solution to a 70 year hiccup caused entirely by the marketing and lobbying departments of the motoring and petrochemical industry. It needs to stop and the relative investment and time needed to turn it around is relatively tiny compared to just maintaining the status quo.
His statement isn’t pragmatic policy, it isn’t realistic. It’s just another small man who can’t see beyond his steering wheel and lacks the leadership skills to encourage his constituents to.
it also ignored the
it also ignored the incredible proven ROI investing in active travel has for any country. 38 to 1 just in health benefits. Never mind reduced road spending as wankpanzers damage the road so much.
Hmmm.
Hmmm.
Ian’t current Tory policy to invest £9.9bn in Active Travel? Though the Chancellor may have a beady eye on part of it.
And isn’t Kit the Twit a rather inconsistent vampire at the Halloween Party making moaning noises?
I’d like to know whether the interviewer asked him if he was wanting to cancel all spending on recharging points, since BEVs don’t pay road tax either.
My political diagnosis is that he is an MP representing Nimbyland under close threat from the Lib Dems (26k majority only – a 34% swing like the last byelection and he is cheese on toast). He needs a narrative to defeat the Lib Dem promises to build millions of houses everywhere but North Hampshire. And this a bit of it.
I’ll break it down:
I’ll break it down:
“Whilst all the arguments point to the motorist being in the wrong.” – woohoo! we’re in agreement, common ground!
“WHO PAYS ROAD TAX …..CYCLIST OR MOTORIST.” – trick question. the answer is neither.
“Surely if cyclists are given rights of way” – not sure about this, are they suggesting that my front garden will be designated as a right of way. Not sure that’s a benefit.
” then they should contribute by paying road tax…” – okay if you’re suggesting that adults should pay to use the road then most of them do through other forms of tax that actually exist. If you’re suggesting that a 5 year old child should pay to use the road then, if drivers can keep him alive for long enough, I’m sure he will.
The 5 year old already pays
The 5 year old already pays for the roads through general taxation.
Every time he buys a comic, a
Every time he buys a comic, a happy meal, sweets etc…
Exactly. Some might say it’s
Exactly. Some might say it’s not much, but it’s the proportion that is considered ‘fair’ as reflected in UK law.
I hadn’t thought of that.
I hadn’t thought of that. Apart from the pocket money spend his existence generates thousands of pounds of economic activity.
Re: profligate cycling
Re: profligate cycling spending. The question is this: “Do you want real spending or woke spending”?
Splurging the thick end of £10bn on cycling and walking jollies is all very well in times of prosperity, but we have hundreds of billions to pay back courtesy of handouts to the furlough crowd.
Because of this, we need to tighten our belts (difficult for some people here admittedly), and priorise spending on health, education and pensions, not virtue signalling projects with zero net benefit.
I would suggest a good way to fund cycling would be to get fracking restarted . You could then have a special fund set up from levies generated to pay for new paths and the like. This would keep everyone happy, and would result in economic growth and prosperity for all.
Hi again Nige!
Hi again Nige!
Given that cycling has a ROI* OF 38:1 in just health related benefits, your usual level of bollox is even further off the mark
Investing 1bn in cycling would generate 38bn health saving. Investing 1bn in health wouldn’t have quite the same effect now would it. Even your limited displayed intelligence can work that out
*https://cyclingfallacies.com/en/23/it%E2%80%99s-too-expensive-to-provide-for-cycling
nosferatu1001 wrote:
Haha, thanks for the chuckle. With figures like that, you must believe HS2 will generate trillions for UK PLC.
With your fake ROI of 38-to-1 it begs the question: why bother doing anything else? Just spend £1tn a year on cycle paths and in year 2 you’ll have £38tn to spend on cycle paths. In year 3, over a quadrillion. Crikey, by year 10 you’d have generated £centillions (that’s a big number) in wealth.
Best write to the world’s leading economists and let them know. Humanity is saved.
I am surprised you haven’t
I am surprised you haven’t resorted to questioning the level of their education yet.
Rakia wrote:
love the citation free “dissection” you did there Nige! Unluckily for you and your proven inability to parse very simple sentences, money saved isn’t the same as money created.
Whoops. Carry on troll. Or fuck off. Yeah. Fuck off.
nosferatu1001 wrote:
Are you telling me you can’t reinvest a saved or extended life in building cycling infrastructure?!
Good point and a new argument
Good point and a new argument – we can’t build cycling infra because if all these lives are being saved we’ll have a population catastrophe within a week.
Or is that balanced by the thousands of pedestrians they’ll run over every year?
Ah, I see the problem here.
Ah, I see the problem here. You’ve moved outside your normal field of study (trying to work out if people with penises are blokes or women) into the grown up world of accountancy definitions.
ROI stands “Return on investment”, and is a measure of surplus value created by investing money. It has nothing to do with saving money. You stated, without limit, that cycling has a net ROI of 3800%. Your words, not mine.
If you’re prepared to take that back, I will forgive your petulent language.
Rakia wrote:
oh hi again definitely a banned poster, given you’re referencing a very old thread ? seems to rile you that trans women are women, but luckily, no one cares what you think.
Now, I didn’t state that. At all. You could have quoted but then your fuckery would have been rather more obvious. What I said, and is backed up by an actual citation unlike your factually incorrect mere opinion, is that it has a ROI of 38:1 in HEALTHCARE SAVINGS. Now, I know your fortė is clearly not reading all of a sentence, but I figured even you would have managed to get the whole way through that, so it’s either incompetence or malice. Given your posting history of being a racist, transphobic idiot, hanlons razor suggests it’s the latter.
so not taking anything back. Restating for the hard of thinking such as yourself.
bye bye baby troll
Rakia wrote:
Sadly this won’t be possible as they’ve all quit for a different line of work. http://www.murderousmaths.co.uk/elvis.htm
Was you born an F-wit or did
Was you born an F-wit or did you have to put in years of practice ?
Well he seems to put hours of
Well he seems to put hours of practice in on here every day, so I’d assume the f-wittery is the result of long hard graft.
If we are just going to say
If we are just going to say stupid ideas, how about:
Doubling “road tax”?
Use half the extra money raised to pay for really good cycling and walking infrastructure and the other half to pay walkists and cyclers to use said infrastructure.
Any upset car owners need only replace a proportion of their car use with active transport to get some of their money back.
Annual pothole filling budget
Annual pothole filling budget is £1bn so £9.9bn over multiple years doesn’t seem like a lot to spend, particularly when it has been shown time and again that getting people moved onto active travel options takes load off other services (eg NHS), normally delivering a net saving to the country.
But hey, let’s label active travel as a jolly and ‘virtue signalling’, and use it to promote fracking. Brilliant.
Anyone who is banned from a
Anyone who is banned from a forum but returns with a different username is not only a troll but a mentally unstable fuckwit.
Rakia wrote:
You seem to be against ‘woke’ spending (whatever you think that means). I can only presume that you only want racist spending – lots more money going to already privileged white men (maybe a bit to white women and some to minorities that are already rich).
You’re some kind of racist prick aren’t you?
hawkinspeter wrote:
Well let’s see about that. The vast majority of cyclists are middle class white men. You want to divert spending which benefits all colours and creeds to primarily benefit middle class white men, yourself included.
Remind me again, who is the racist prick here?
That would be you. Learn some manners.
Rakia wrote:
It’s you. You’re the racist prick and everyone wants you to just fuck off
hawkinspeter wrote:
Yup!
.
.
You speak for yourself, sunshine. You certainly don’t speak for me, so – QED – you are wrong to say ‘everyone wants…’.
.
See ya.
.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
I’m glad to not be speaking for you as you just pop up, post some snark and disappear again. However, I wouldn’t put you into the same category as a couple of the PBUs posting here and I’m sure you have posted the occasional amusing comment.
I’m sure that with your Manichean view of the world, you consider that my use of “everyone” must absolutely include every single person without exception, whereas most people would consider it a figure of speech, but then you’re not practised at nuanced thinking are you?
Where did you get your
Where did you get your statistics from?
One can only suppose critical
One can only suppose critical thinking isn’t one of your strengths “Rakia”. If the U.K. were to build extensive cycle networks in our cities who would benefit the most from that?
We have very good evidence as to who benefits most and it isn’t middle class white males.
Now while manners do maketh the man one must make exceptions, so please do fuck off you absolute fuckwit.
I’m amazed all these accounts
I’m amazed all these accounts haven’t just suggested that we start knocking down houses to build more roads everywhere (like what almost happened in this place) – after all it’s an economic benefit, will boost growth and will generate employment (for road workers, housing officers, vehicle recovery services, crash investigators…)
I’m always a bit confused by those who are all about “they’re taking our liberties and interfering in our lives – it’s a woke communist dictatorship” but are also happy to declare that cyclists should have number plates. (Bit like certain friends who’re worried about the state spying on them [“chips”!] but are happy to carry around a mobile tracking device 24/7 and also video themselves / post what they’re doing to facebook, instagram, snapchat, twitter…)
Basic logic. They’re
Basic logic. They’re incapable of it.
Rakia wrote:
Yes, the majority of cyclists prepared to cycle on the roads as they currenty exist are middle aged white men.
Where extensive cycle networks exist this shifts to a much wider section of society.
So who does active travel spending benefit? the people who are currently cycling despite lack of provision, or the ones who have been intimidated off the roads by the (percieved?) hostile environment?
.
.
He doesn’t do manners.
.
He is ALWAYS right, so it’s OK for him to abuse others.
.
Do you like defending racists
Do you like defending racists. You always seems to do it when he appears back on here. So as you do defend them I’m going to believe you are a racist.
Why is it you only worry
Why is it you only worry about one poster who you claim abuses others? Do you not notice the other posters?
I thought you believed in free speech?
Complete Trolling nonsense.
Complete Trolling nonsense. Please go away. Thank you.
Rakia wrote:
Got anything to support this highly spurious claim?
I for one can think of a few people who wouldn’t appreciate this outcome: the people who experience tremors and fear their houses falling down and the people in the generations down the line who will have to live with the climate change resulting from using fracked fuels. And that’s not to mention the damage caused to the environment when harmful chemicals end up in the watercourse.
Not just that mate, we are a
Not just that mate, we are a small island and we often get our drinking water from underground aquifers, contaminating one of those with a mistake could leave us quite thirsty.
O’rly
O’rly
I think we should look first
I think we should look first at the new roads budget, given the climate emergency and the governments commitments to reduce carbon emissions, providing additional road capacity (which will soon be filled up) will only lead to increased emissions.
Might have guessed it was you
Might have guessed it was you again talking complete and utter b*llocks. Go away.
I’d like to see what gets cut
I’d like to see what gets cut from the highways budget. In West Yorkshire, there was £10 million spent on widening a 500m long stretch of A-Road in keighley, just to make car journeys slightly faster in the short term.
With regard to the 5 year old
With regard to the 5 year old cyclist and road tax. First there is no such thing as Road Tax, it is Vehicle Excise Duty. This is not levied on every vehicle. For example it is not levied on bycycles or horsedrawn carts. Also some mortor vehicles are exempt. Second, in the UK there are no hypothecated taxes. All revenues raised from tax and duties go into the Exchequer from which public speding is financed. Third, children’s toys are largely subject to VAT, so the 5 year old is making a contribution to the Exchequer and hence helps fund road maintenance etc.
The driver didn’t have to
The driver didn’t have to stop for the child. It could have been prevented if they had the presence of mind to slow their speed, not even by much, and the child would have cleared the parked cars and been on a wider section of road.
Safety over Speed.
Unfortunately there are many on the road (on two or four wheels) with a selfish mentality.
You should publish the email
You should publish the email addresses alongside the contents.
We could have hours of fun responding.
I think it’s time to stop
I think it’s time to stop responding to the idiot (to coin wtjs).
Nothing good can come of it.
I’m surprised they are still
I’m surprised they are still allowed here. Although they have now abandoned the pretence they appeared to start with persona based on racial stereotypes. Surely the on line equivalent of ‘blacking up’.
IanMK wrote:
They’ve been banned previously for being a racist piece of shit, so it’s just a matter of time until they’re banned again.
They’re back being
They’re back being transphobic again, so I imagine the racism isn’t far off.
Well being as the site were
Well being as the site were alerted it was definitely Boo / Nigel / Lance / EnjoyTheRide from his very obvious reply last night and he is still on here 24 hours later, I expect they won’t as having the engagement is better for them then keeping the site clear of racists.
Any chance you could draw
Any chance you could draw some attention to this
Hi,
Hi,
Yeah we’re working on something with an eye to publishing tomorrow. Thanks
Listening to the Malthouse
Listening to the Malthouse interview, but I *severely* object to LBC demanding everything down to my DOB, postcode and phone number.
Had to go and look up the details of BBC Broadcasting House to fill in.
21 minutes in btw.
I just used Nick Ferrari’s
I just used Nick Ferrari’s home postcode – readily available on Companies House.
I was also surprised to see he had £3m in his company bank account – surprising given he spends most of his time banging on about overpaid politicians on £84k salaries he must be clearing a good £600-800k a year for spouting off on the radio and moaning that his chaeffeur driven car has been delayed by cyclists on Regent Street again.
I know I’m a guilty of not
I know I’m a guilty of not practising what I preach, but could we please just stop feeding the trolls? Maybe then they’ll go away.
The bird picture was so near
The bird picture was so near to opening a rich seam of content based around “a bearded tit on a bike”
Bloody cyclists blocking
Bloody cyclists blocking ambulances
https://mobile.twitter.com/jonburkeUK/status/1590742612860088322
a bird on the chain is worth
a bird on the chain is worth two in the bush.
John Lewis ad…..
John Lewis ad…..
sorry, must have something in my eye
Kit Malthouse is clearly,
Kit Malthouse is clearly, ahem, misinformed, to say the least, but he is an MP, and ex-minister and therefore has some influence, and I’m pretty sure he’s not alone in his party or parliament. That means that Active Travel funding is under threat, and, let’s face it, it’s an easy target. So we, cyclists and walkers, have to get agitating to stop the cuts.
I’ve already written to my MP, Mark Harper, co-incidentally the new Transport Minister, and it would really help if we all wrote to our MPs, especially anyone who lives in Malthouse’s constituency.
Thinking about it again, I’ll find out if I can go to one of Harper’s surgeries and make my case in person; again, it would help if others could do the same with their MPs.
We fought hard to get that funding; let’s not let it get snatched away by ill-informed petrolheads like Malthouse, even if he is an ex-cyclist.
EDIT: Harper was on Question Time last night, and when talking about his new brief as Transport Minister, he mentioned every form of transport, apart from what? Go on, have a guess.
I wonder what he thinks about
I wonder what he thinks about the 27bn new road building budget?
iandusud wrote:
Oh, I’m sure he’d be willing to cut that by a pound or even two.