[mdavidford]

WeLoveHills wrote:

WeLoveHills wrote:

£40. A lot for a book? Quite reasonable for a pair of tyres?

Depends – how gripping is it?

[mdavidford]

The frustration isn’t really

The frustration isn’t really so much the actions of the pedestrians. It’s the having to use a shared path and deal with those actions. The actions just happen to be the point at which that frustration materialises.

[mdavidford]

zideriup wrote:

Pedestrians are required advised to keep right and walk facing oncoming traffic (HC rule 1 and 2).

That’s on a road, though. Shared space is rule 13, and it’s pretty silent on where you should be, other than that you should ‘take care not to obstruct or endanger [cyclists].’

[mdavidford]

You could, of course, do both

You could, of course, do both…

[mdavidford]

wtjs wrote:

It’s not a ‘narrative’, it’s the truth.

It’s both. The narrative shapes the truth, and the truth reinforces the narrative. It’s a vicious circle. So you have two options: give up and accept that it’ll always be like that, or try to do something differently.

wtjs wrote:

Forget all this homely ‘why can’t we all just get along’ bollocks

Except no-one here is saying that. What they’re saying is that if we want things to change we have to think (and cause others to think) differently about the situation. Otherwise we’re just perpetuating the same old anti-patterns.

Far from ‘just getting along’, the suggestion is to challenge people’s thinking by using language that subverts the comfortable norm.

[mdavidford]

Are they made of cheese?

Are they made of cheese?

[mdavidford]

hawkinspeter wrote:

Comrade Stevenson obviously meant “everyone riding a cycle”

Does that include the penguins?

[mdavidford]

I think part of the problem

I think part of the problem is that the concept attached to ‘cyclist’* has become removed from that of ‘person’. Which makes it easier, when reading the word, to bring to mind a lumpen ‘tribe’ (whether your view of that ‘tribe’ is good or bad), rather than a feeling, fragile, and flawed person.

Personally, I have been trying (and commonly failing) to refer to ‘people/person cycling/driving’, but breaking the habit of using the shorter ‘cyclist/driver’ isn’t easy. It can also impact the fluency of what you’re writing, but in a way, perhaps that’s the point – it seems not fluent because it breaks with what we expect and forces us to think differently.

( and, to an extent, ‘driver’ too, although there’s more of a tendency there to use the depersonalised ‘car’. )

[mdavidford]

Apparently it’s a catfish.

Apparently it’s a catfish.

So presumably Antonio?

[mdavidford]

I was envisaging them riding

I was envisaging them riding something more like this.

(Not sure who the friend in the background is, though.)

[mdavidford]

I think you’ve rather missed

I think you’ve rather missed the point that the whole challenge arises from a transition to electric vehicles, where fuel, as such, goes away, and with it the whole basis of our existing tax system. Adding a few pence to the tax on fuel won’t have much effect if no-one’s using any to start with.

[mdavidford]

I’m not saying the proceeds

I’m not saying the proceeds should be used specifically to pay for the roads. I’m looking at it from a ‘what should we tax to discourage an anti-social behaviour [private vehicle use]?’ / ‘how can we fill a hole in the public finances left by declining fuel/vehicle duty?’ perspective.

I’m not a big fan of hypothecation in this instance, and would rather see the roads (and public transport) continue to be paid for out of general taxation, so that the budget can be based on what’s needed*, rather than what we happen to be able to raise through vehicle-related taxation.

[We’re talking ideal world, here – I wouldn’t suggest that what’s currently spent on public transport bears much relation to what’s needed.]

[mdavidford]

I’d start by making all on

I’d start by making all on-road parking charged, and (so that that doesn’t unfairly penalise those who can’t afford it) adding an element in to the council tax calculation for off-road parking provision*.

[*This does rather conflict with my preference for replacing council tax with a local income tax, but let’s cross that bridge if and when we get to it…]

[mdavidford]

Jimmy Ray Will wrote:

Another demonstration of our current adminstration playing to the crowds.

Well, except that the person raising this isn’t part of the administration – just a random backbencher. And the relevant minister basically rolled their eyes and told them to do one.

[mdavidford]

Mungecrundle wrote:

Mungecrundle wrote:

I once had a nasty incident involving a spoon. How many people are injured every year by spoons?

You need…

Spooooooon Guaaaaard

[Author]

Replies