Who wants to be Taoiseach?

Sleepy

Just for a break from all the IRA threads... :P

While cooking my dinner this evening I got to thinking about how much unnecessary plastic packaging there was. Given that plastic is a non-biodegradable material, that it comes from a non-renewable source (i.e. oil) and that there are many renewable alternatives, it just seems totally stupid that we allow it's use in packaging for vegetables etc (particularly things like mushrooms that actually keep better when they can breathe) when we charge consumers for plastic carrier bags.

Well, that's one of the small pieces of legislation I'd draft if I were Taoiseach for a week: place a levy (payable by the producer rather than the consumer) on plastic packaging.

So, what small piece of legislation would you draft into being if you were at the head of the cabinet for a day?

Villain

Sleepy wrote:

Just for a break from all the IRA threads... :P

Oh yes please

Sleepy wrote:

Well, that's one of the small pieces of legislation I'd draft if I were Taoiseach for a week: place a levy (payable by the producer rather than the consumer) on plastic packaging.

Problem with that is the cost always works it way down the line to the customer and usually gets a bit added on as well

Sleepy wrote:

So, what small piece of legislation would you draft into being if you were at the head of the cabinet for a day?

I'd go a stop further and ban all plastics from packaging.

But my main legilsation would be to abolish VRT, and introduce a method of road taxation that is dependent on the ammount of milage you do.

E.G. Charge a basic charge of €50 for every vehicle then another €5 for every 1000 miles clocked up. In addition charge cars €1 for entering city centers during 8am and 5pm.

Now I know this legislation is not perfect but I think it could be developed to make a very fair system that sees the main users of the roads pay more than less frequent users, it may help encourage people to use public transport.

I would also like to see electronic speed controls introduced, like the one used to control the speed of an F1 car in the pit lane.

E.G. when you pass a 50 km/h sign it sends a signal to the vehicle that forces it to reduce it speed and not break that speed limit, then when you pass the 80 km/h sign you can speed up to that speed etc. (BTW I realise the cost that would be involved, but you can't put a value on the hundreds of lives lost each year on our roads)

Just something I've always thought would help the transport system, I'm sure people will probably think there crazy ideas.

dahamsta

Although there's loads of little bits and pieces I'd like to sort out, particularly on the telecommunications front, the major issue I'd like to tackle is justice. I'd strip the luxuries out of all prisons, leaving just the basic human rights; and I'd make sentencing guidelines a lot tougher for all crimes.

It's my firm belief that if measures like this were implemented crime rates would lower dramaticaly, albeit after a short initial period where people just didn't understand the consequences of their actions. With that in mind, to be fair, the sentencing guidelines could be increased year-on-year for an initial introductory period not more than three years.

IMHO all of this doesn't just make sense from a societal point of view, but also economically because in time there'll be a lot less people in prison, and they'll cost a lot less to keep there.

And ye call me a liberal. Pfff. Vote Dahamsta.

adam

Sleepy

I'd agree with the essence of that Dahamsta but it's hardly something that can be achieved in a short period of time is it? I'm talking about the basic things that should be the day to day running of this country (i.e. fixing the mistakes that our useless court system and flawed legislation have allowed into the canons of this country) if only governments could conentrate on actually doing the job at hand instead of furthering their own (and their cronies) interests and playing at party politics.

dahamsta

If you don't think packaging producers and manufacturers would battle for at least a couple of years against your suggestion, I think a career in politics should be way down your list Sleepy.

adam

billy the squid

If I were taoseach what would I do.

Well one of the things I would do to start with would be to re-nationalise the physical telephone and broadband network. after that eircom could buy and resel eirtime on a level playing field as the other companies in the market. This would generate revenue for upgrading the telecom network.

after that I would make the possession of chewing gum a crime punnishable by a lengthy prison sentence. anyone caught with chewing gum will be forced in chain gangs to clean streets during their sentence

I would remove pool tables and colour televisions from prisons. prisoners would be made work for a weekly allowance (enough for smokes and stuff) but not too much maybe €30 a wee, 80 fags is enough for one week i think.

the word concurrent would be removed from the statute books

Limerick would get its boundry extension as far as shannon to the north, adare to the west and newport to the east. the airport would be renamed to Limerick international Airport, and a deal would have to be worked out to encourage low fares airlines to begin trans atlantic flights (ryanair and the like)

I would ban cars from all city centres. only public transport would be allowed into major cities, with park and ride services on the outskirts.

I would also change the national anthem for something less militant to something which reflects the welcoming nature of the irish people. maybe luke kelly's song for ireland.

Sleepy

Not much they could do about it really. Didn't take long for the government to pass the carrier bag levy, can't see my suggestion being any harder to implement.

Rock Climber

irish1 wrote:

I would also like to see electronic speed controls introduced, like the one used to control the speed of an F1 car in the pit lane.

E.G. when you pass a 50 km/h sign it sends a signal to the vehicle that forces it to reduce it speed and not break that speed limit, then when you pass the 80 km/h sign you can speed up to that speed etc. (BTW I realise the cost that would be involved, but you can't put a value on the hundreds of lives lost each year on our roads)

how about if you are driving behind a slow sunday driver doing 20 in a 50k zone or 40 in an 80, you have the ability to send a signal to speed him up...

Nuttzz

If I was the teashop....

I'd bring in mandatory sentences for all sex offenders (10 years min)

Remove all long term unemployment benefit, if chinese students can get a job here why cant they

Strip the chruch of all its assets, sell them off and make the funds available to its victims

Ban the word "bud"

Change school start times to 1030 and finish times to 1545 and reduce the amount of school holidays

Introduce a proper complaints system for the Gardai.

Join NATO

Remove public sector unions

Get someone in the civil service to answer the goddamn phones!

Ensure all public places had proper disabled access

dahamsta

Sleepy wrote:

Not much they could do about it really. Didn't take long for the government to pass the carrier bag levy, can't see my suggestion being any harder to implement.

The carrier bag levy concerned just one industry, perhaps two: carrier bag manufacturers and carrier bag distributors. Manufacturers wouldn't have brought much pressure to bear because most carrier bags are imported from the far east these days. Distributors would have been a bit ticked off but there isn't a whole lot of margin in carrier bags, and there was an increase in alternatives, which cost more and have higher margins. Retailers didn't really care at all, because the cost was transferred to the consumer, they made a saving on the free bags they were giving out, and there's a few quid in alternatives.

What you're proposing is entirely different. You're talking about transferring the cost to manufacturers instead of the consumer, which is going to add up to a hell of a lot more than the tens of pounds consumers spend anually on plastic bags. You're talking about manufacturers cutting back on their packaging expenditure, which is going to cut into packaging distributor profilts. You're talking about increasing the cost of products, which is going to hurt both the supply and retail chains. And all of this is going to be in the hands of powerful lobby groups who know how to stymie new laws.

I can see the press releases from the lobby groups already: "Packaging levy will cost manufacturing industry millions, ultimate cost will be to consumers." It's a good idea like, but it won't fy through like the plastic bag levy. I could see it being caught up in debate for 2-3 years minimum.

adam

ArthurDent

Great Thread!

When I become supreme ditactor - sorry....if I became taoiseach

I'd bring all public schools under government control and make them non-denominational, if you want a denominational education - grand, but you pay for it!

I'd make it a requirement that developers donate (not sell at market value) enough land around new developments for adaquate schools, community facitlities (include a sports ground and swimming pool and library) for every 20,000 people. And i'd damn well make sure they were built.

I'd insist that TD's and councillors use public transport.

I'd get rid of free car parking in all government/ state and semi-state depts - that'd improve public transport no-end.

I'd build a rail link from the airport.

I'd ban Pat Kenny from TV and radio for ever!

Sleepy

dahamsta wrote:

The carrier bag levy concerned just one industry, perhaps two: carrier bag manufacturers and carrier bag distributors. Manufacturers wouldn't have brought much pressure to bear because most carrier bags are imported from the far east these days. Distributors would have been a bit ticked off but there isn't a whole lot of margin in carrier bags, and there was an increase in alternatives, which cost more and have higher margins. Retailers didn't really care at all, because the cost was transferred to the consumer, they made a saving on the free bags they were giving out, and there's a few quid in alternatives.

What you're proposing is entirely different. You're talking about transferring the cost to manufacturers instead of the consumer, which is going to add up to a hell of a lot more than the tens of pounds consumers spend anually on plastic bags. You're talking about manufacturers cutting back on their packaging expenditure, which is going to cut into packaging distributor profilts. You're talking about increasing the cost of products, which is going to hurt both the supply and retail chains. And all of this is going to be in the hands of powerful lobby groups who know how to stymie new laws.

I can see the press releases from the lobby groups already: "Packaging levy will cost manufacturing industry millions, ultimate cost will be to consumers." It's a good idea like, but it won't fy through like the plastic bag levy. I could see it being caught up in debate for 2-3 years minimum.

adam

For every reduction in plastic packaging, there'd be an equivalent rise in alternative packaging methods. I'd predict large-scale moves back to more traditional packaging methods such as glass bottles/cardboard packets etc.

Honestly though, I suppose the same effect could be gained would be by introducing the recycling practices in use in Galway throughout the rest of the country (then we'd really hear the Dubs whinging!).

magpie

I'd scrap VRT but put an extra 1% tax on petrol.

I'd make Pub Licences (beer/wine) available to anyone who wanted one. If the Govt can copy the NYC smoking ban then we can copy their approach to bars too. Lots of nice, small friendly places rather then binge-drink encouraging warehouse sized mega pubs.

Vote Magpie.

simu

Mandatory lessons on child-care and nutrition for all parents after the birth of a child.

dahamsta

Sleepy wrote:

For every reduction in plastic packaging, there'd be an equivalent rise in alternative packaging methods. I'd predict large-scale moves back to more traditional packaging methods such as glass bottles/cardboard packets etc.

Absolutely, but that means serious retooling and reorganisation of the supply chain, which is precisely why the manufacturers and distributors would try to hold up the process for as long as possible. They would also likely look for compensation for the process, which is another thing that will hold up proceedings. Again, I think it's a great idea, I just don't think it's the quick fix you envision. There are very few quick fixes in politics. In fact you'd wonder how long the plastic bag levy process took from suggestion to implementation.

Honestly though, I suppose the same effect could be gained would be by introducing the recycling practices in use in Galway throughout the rest of the country (then we'd really hear the Dubs whinging!).

Recycling has improved dramatically in Cork in the past few years, but even with that implementation has been horrendous. Waste disposal in Cork is not an issue we want to get started on though...

adam

gom

Fully Legalise Cannabis
Legalise Ecstasy, Magic Mushrooms, APhetimines
Decriminalise Cocaine and Heroine
Make available free needles and free heroine if the user registered up to a counciling programme to help them off the drug.

Re-nationalise the psychical phone lines

Overhaul the entire primary, seconday curriculum and introduce free pre-school montasory style education up to the age of 7.

Legalise Abortion on a similar scale as France.

Make a year military service mandatory for all males that leave school.

abolish VRT

kick the USA military out of Shannon and kick the Us ambassador out of the park.

reintroduce capital punishment for the day and kill Michael McDowell, Aine Ni (nazi racist woman) and roy keane.

landser

nationalise all telecommunication systems

rescind the smoking ban

do away with neutrality and join NATO

campaign for a no vote in the EU constitution vote and veto Turkey's entry to the EU... and delay the remaining states entry for as long as possible.

Invest heavily in public transport- reopen the western rail corridor, extend the sligo line to derry, and put in a link to cavan. Scrap the NRA along with most of the plans for future roads.

get tough on petty crime, and have an open and reasoned debate on bringing back the death penalty.

i could go on for hours......

Stabshauptmann

Sleepy wrote:

payable by the producer rather than the consumer

You cant do that, it depends on the elasticity of the market ofcourse, but generally a tax no matter who it is levied on it paid for by both consumer and producer. Its one of the surprising things I learnt in economics

Sleepy

Necromancer wrote:

You cant do that, it depends on the elasticity of the market ofcourse, but generally a tax no matter who it is levied on it paid for by both consumer and producer. Its one of the surprising things I learnt in economics

True only if you're dealing with a perfectly free market which I'm afraid we don't live in.

dahamsta

landser wrote:

i could go on for hours......

You could go on for as long as you like, but until you come up with something realistic, all we'll do is laugh at you.

foxybrowne

I would amend the local government act, to facilitat the setting up statutory parish/community/town councils the country over and give them certain powers to deal with minor issues in the local area, as is the case in England, France, Switzerland and most of Western Europe.

billy the squid

thoguht we had that already,

Nuttzz

one additional thing.

you c**ts who ride horses in the city, your going down..........

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

I would also like to see electronic speed controls introduced, like the one used to control the speed of an F1 car in the pit lane.

E.G. when you pass a 50 km/h sign it sends a signal to the vehicle that forces it to reduce it speed and not break that speed limit, then when you pass the 80 km/h sign you can speed up to that speed etc.

I like to make my own driving decisions, thanks. There are plenty of things I trust computers to do, and driving isn't one of them.

Your F1 comparison is interesting: last I heard, the pit lane speed limiter was a driver-operated control, and it's still the driver's responsibility to use it and not to exceed the speed limit.

Villain

oscarBravo wrote:

I like to make my own driving decisions, thanks. There are plenty of things I trust computers to do, and driving isn't one of them.

Your F1 comparison is interesting: last I heard, the pit lane speed limiter was a driver-operated control, and it's still the driver's responsibility to use it and not to exceed the speed limit.

Problem is OscarBravo, the decisions that drivers take on roads kill hundreds of people each year, I personally don't have any problems with my speed been controlled because I don't break the law.

Only people who speed would have anything to lose with the system I described, but hey how dare they try to get people to obey the law and save lives.

dahamsta

I think people's thoughts should be monitored and if they think of committing a crime these thoughts should be transmitted wirelessly to the Gardaí. Only people who think of committing crime would have anything to lose with the system I described, but hey how dare they try to get people to not think of committing crimes.

adam

Villain

lol good one dahamsta, pitty it isn't possible, as where my idea is very possible and would save lives.

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

Problem is OscarBravo, the decisions that drivers take on roads kill hundreds of people each year

So ban driving.

The point you're missing is that the decisions that drivers take on roads prevent the deaths of hundreds of people each year. Decision making is one of the most important parts of driving, and - as I've said - I don't trust a machine to make my decisions for me.

I'm very happy to have a machine assist me in my decision-making processes. The speedo in my car is one such device, and a very effective one.

irish1 wrote:

I personally don't have any problems with my speed been controlled because I don't break the law.

Me neither, as a rule. I'm quite happy to have my speed controlled by a combination of informational signs, measurement devices both in my car and in the hands of the police, and the threat of legal sanction.

irish1 wrote:

Only people who speed would have anything to lose with the system I described, but hey how dare they try to get people to obey the law and save lives.

They already have measures in place to get people to obey the law and save lives. My objection is to measures that would force machines to obey the law.

Ever heard of the law of unintended consequences?

dahamsta

irish1 wrote:

lol good one dahamsta, pitty it isn't possible, as where my idea is very possible and would save lives.

It's not actually that far off being possible irish1. Can you say the phrase "slippery slope"? How about "Patriot Act"? "Camp Delta"?

adam

Villain

Oscar Bravo I think it is safe to assume the current measures in place aren't enough to stop people speeding.

I believe the system I described is workable,and would save lives. I might settle for a restrictor been put on vehicles that stop they from going above 80 mph but the problem with that is if you were to drive 80 mph on some of our back roads you would certianly be at risk of crashing into someone.

I'm not saying my idea is perfect, but I would like to see it tested.

dahamsta

irish1 wrote:

I believe the system I described is workable,and would save lives.

Only if you're gullible enough to believe government propaganda that tells us speed kills, and not the starkly obvious truth: bad driving kills. Bad driving encouraged by that self-same government's woefully inadequate driving test system, I might add.

adam

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

Oscar Bravo I think it is safe to assume the current measures in place aren't enough to stop people speeding.

...or overtaking on blind bends, or tailgating, or pulling out in front of oncoming traffic, or drunk driving, or...

What's your hi-tech solution for these problems?

irish1 wrote:

I believe the system I described is workable,and would save lives.

I don't doubt it. My question is, how many people would it kill? More to the point, how far are you prepared to go to eliminate personal responsibility?

irish1 wrote:

I might settle for a restrictor been put on vehicles that stop they from going above 80 mph but the problem with that is if you were to drive 80 mph on some of our back roads you would certianly be at risk of crashing into someone.

Oh look, a technological solution with a major flaw. What a surprise.

irish1 wrote:

I'm not saying my idea is perfect, but I would like to see it tested.

The first time someone tries to install a computer in my car that thinks it's a better driver than me, I'm getting out my soldering iron.

Don't get me wrong, I've no problem with driver aids that know their limitations. An example is ABS: obviously the car knows better than I do when the wheels are likely to lock up under braking. That's a far cry from knowing what's a safe speed to drive at.

Villain

Can you say any speed above the speed limit is safe??

I agree there is more to dangerous driving than speeding but I think speeding is the main issue. My idea is to limit the speed of every car to the speed limit, I'm not an engineer so I can't say what exactly is the best way to do it, I put forward one idea but I'm sure there is many more ways of doing it.

e.g. a recording system that records the speed of your car and the speed zone your in and sends that information to the Gardai, I think some insurance companies have simalar systems already in use.

dahamsta

irish1 wrote:

Can you say any speed above the speed limit is safe?

Yes, I can. I could drive on a straight empty motorway in my large saloon at speeds in excess of 100mph and I would feel perfectly comfortable doing so, with no risk to myself or (obviously) anyone else. If I had a supercar and the road was suitable, you could probably push that up to 150mph. Other less experienced drivers might not feel as comfortable. I wouldn't feel as comfortable doing it in a small hatchback, or if there was traffic on the road, or if it was foggy, or there were cattle crossing. But the answer remains yes.

In other words: Speed limits are another artificial measure introduced to deal with the lowest common denominator. Like yourself. If you really want to deal with the lowest common denominator, you're not going far enough: You should take cars out of the hands of people altogether, and introduce a public transport system operated entirely by computers. Better yet, have everyone work from home so they don't go outside at all. Oh wait, they can't, because we don't have the communications infrastructure...

adam

Villain

dahamsta wrote:

Yes, I can. I could drive on a straight empty motorway in my large saloon at speeds in excess of 100mph and I would feel perfectly comfortable doing so, with no risk to myself or (obviously) anyone else. If I had a supercar and the road was suitable, you could probably push that up to 150mph. Other less experienced drivers might not feel as comfortable. I wouldn't feel as comfortable doing it in a small hatchback. Sometimes I will drive well below the speed limit because of prevailing circumstances, such as fog, or cattle on the road.

In other words: Speed limits are another artificial measure introduced to deal with the lowest common denominator. Like yourself. If you really want to deal with the lowest common denominator, you're not going far enough: You should take cars out of the hands of people altogether, and introduce a public transport system operated entirely by computers. Better yet, have everyone work from home so they don't go outside at all. Oh wait, they can't, because we don't have the communications infrastructure...

adam

Empty motorway???

I think you'll find it hard to find one of them in Ireland, and what if you got a blow out at 100mph would you feel confident that you could control the car so well that there would be no risk to yourself?

dahamsta

irish1 wrote:

I think you'll find it hard to find one of them in Ireland

Which just goes to show you've never travelled in the middle of the night, and are hardly qualified to comment.

and what if you got a blow out at 100mph would you feel confident that you could control the car so well that their would be no risk to yourself?

It would depend on the circumstances. I could get a blowout at 20mph and lose control of a car. Should the limits on motorways be lowered to 20mph?

adam

Villain

dahamsta wrote:

Which just goes to show you've never travelled in the middle of the night, and are hardly qualified to comment.

Yes I have but I could never say 100% that motorway would be empty, neither could you before you travelled on it, a lot of artics travel at night, and I have been driving on motorways for several years so I think I am more than qualified to comment.

dahamsta wrote:

It would depend on the circumstances. I could get a blowout at 20mph and lose control of a car. Should the limits on motorways be lowered to 20mph?

adam

Thats just a silly comment. I was simply arguing the point you made that you could drive on an emtpy motorway at 100 mph and be at no risk, thats simply not true.

Roisin Dubh

If I became Taoiseach I would draft the following laws:

A: Tax-breaks for private hospitals to help take the pressure off the state-owned hospitals.

B: Open up the insurance market to foreign insurance-companies to bring down the collossal motor-insurance premiums in this country.

C: Legalise gay civil-partnerships/marriages while preventing them being used to get Irish citizenship.

Legalise land-casinos.

E: Deregulate the pub industry to remove the cap on licenses, in the hope of bringing down drink prices.

F: End Bord Gais's monopoly on gas-sector.

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

I agree there is more to dangerous driving than speeding but I think speeding is the main issue.

I vehemently disagree with this. Of all the dangerous driving practices I see around me every day, speed is by far the least of my worries.

irish1 wrote:

My idea is to limit the speed of every car to the speed limit

That's the other problem with your idea: the theory that slower is always safer. Have you never, ever been in a situation where it made more sense to accelerate than to brake? How would you feel in such a situation if your car decided it knew better than you?

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

what if you got a blow out at 100mph would you feel confident that you could control the car so well that there would be no risk to yourself?

Got a blowout at 70mph on the M4 once. Wasn't a problem.

Villain

Big difference between 70 mph and 100mph.

Yes I have been situations where it made more sense to speed up, but I would say on most those occasions I still didn't exceed the speed limit.

IMO speeding is the main issue, I drive over 700 miles a week and most of the incidents I see are caused by someone speeding, or attemping to speed, i.e. overtaking on a bend because the car in front is driving at the speed limit.

I believe that if every vehicle on the road stayed within the speed limits fatal accidents would decrease by a huge ammount.

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

Big difference between 70 mph and 100mph.

30mph, to be exact. At what speed does a blowout become dangerous?

irish1 wrote:

Yes I have been situations where it made more sense to speed up, but I would say on most those occasions I still didn't exceed the speed limit.

And on the rest of those occasions, how would you have felt if your car didn't react the way you needed it to?

irish1 wrote:

IMO speeding is the main issue, I drive over 700 miles a week and most of the incidents I see are caused by someone speeding, or attemping to speed, i.e. overtaking on a bend because the car in front is driving at the speed limit.

That's stupidity, not speeding, and a decent traffic corps (and proper driver testing etc) would do a lot more to deal with it than a modified car.

irish1 wrote:

I believe that if every vehicle on the road stayed within the speed limits fatal accidents would decrease by a huge ammount.

If every vehicle was removed from the road, fatal road accidents would be eliminated. Doesn't make it an appropriate solution.

Capt'n Midnight

Appoint Gerry Ryan as ambassador to pluto.

Phase out VRT over 5 years AND make make it a prisonable offense for car dealers to increase their margins (based on tax reciepts they submitted) above the level for the past 5 years.

Bring back price control on staple foods

Enforce a corkage charge for pubs and restaraunts if they charge more than consumer index prices - so if you feel you are ripped off you can bring your own and hire a glass.

Allow tax breaks on creches eventually planning to fund them on the extra tax from working mothers.

re-centralise the civil service - moving jobs nearer to places with high unemployment - Areas of Dublin and Limerick, creating yellow pack civil servants at lower pay rates

Massive investment in Primary Schools & Facilities,

Remove subsidies for farmers for artifical fertilizers and pestisides and animals reared indoors. bring back the farmers dole instead of the current headage/acerage systems

Provide free basic health care to everyone, to level of basic Bupa/VIH levels, using loads of cuban doctors or whatever to kick start the system, increase numbers of emergeny ward staff to a level where Irish doctors don't mind working there.

buy a second hand AWACS or Balloon with good cold war radar technology, have it stationed above major citie on a randon rota basis. It'll pick up anything over the speed limit and track them, telescopes / UAV's lower down or patrol cars / speed cameras could ID them.

Large fines for having unreadable number plates

Subsidies to Dublin BUS to be paid for by a congestion charge or levey on car parks in the city centre / savings on building roads that act as car parks.

Accept that the IRA are involded in an armed struggle and apply the Geneve Conventions to them, especially the bits about being caught out of uniform..

Stabshauptmann

Sleepy wrote:

True only if you're dealing with a perfectly free market which I'm afraid we don't live in.

Its more correct in a perfect market but holds for most markets, you cant impose a tax on just the producer or consumer unless the price of a good has no bearing on demand - which is rarely the case.

true

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Accept that the IRA are involded in an armed struggle and apply the Geneve Conventions to them, especially the bits about being caught out of uniform..

You got my vote , Capt'n. It should have been done 35 years ago and it would have saved a lot of lives and property.

Only snag is, it probably would not work now. Too many do-gooders and whiners around.

DeValera executed some IRA in prison in the early forties.

billy the squid

would I be able to put out a fatwa on sophie ellis baxter ?

Villain

oscarBravo wrote:

30mph, to be exact. At what speed does a blowout become dangerous?

Depends on conditions, driver experience etc, but imo if you got a blowout on a motorway at 100 mph you would be at risk. I'm not saying you'll be badly injured or even crash just saying you would be at risk of injurying yourself or others, dahamsta said he could drive on an empty motorway at 100 mph without been at risk, thats just plain nonsense.

oscarBravo wrote:

And on the rest of those occasions, how would you have felt if your car didn't react the way you needed it to?

At risk obviously, I never said my idea was perfect oscarbravo.

oscarBravo wrote:

That's stupidity, not speeding, and a decent traffic corps (and proper driver testing etc) would do a lot more to deal with it than a modified car.

I disagree, IMO prvention is better than cure.

oscarBravo wrote:

If every vehicle was removed from the road, fatal road accidents would be eliminated. Doesn't make it an appropriate solution.

Nope it certianly doesn't, as where idea is workable and would still allow the everyone to travel, be it at legal speeds.

BTW if your unlucky enough to ever be seriously injured and end up in Hospital you will probably find machines making decisions for you, you just won't realise it.

Sleepy

I'd introduce a new tax on living at home once you've completed third level education. This should be equal to the cost of supporting oneself outside of the family home. I believe that many companies are currently getting away with under-paying staff because wage levels are made artificially low by people still sponging off their parents and that this is contributing to our current social inequity problems.

Sleepy

Oh, and a law preventing property developers from sitting on land in urban areas (i.e. develop it or sell it at market value to someone who will develop it inside 6 months)

landser

dahamsta wrote:

You could go on for as long as you like, but until you come up with something realistic, all we'll do is laugh at you.

are you part of the royal family... what's with the royal pronoun?

anyway, for a man who, inter alia, wants to return to 19th century prison conditions, you're not really in a position to criticise

Boggle

Were I the boss...

Introduce massive taxation on 3rd home and above - this will allow you to have a holiday home but weed out investors tying up the housing market(reduce house prices).

Sanitise the public service: get rid of the job for life mentality. Get rid of the dead wod but pay appropriately if standards met.

Deregulate pub closing hours: stop the glut of people falling onto our streets at 2 in the morning.

CCTV for known hotspots of violence if closing times not removed.

Gut the prisons. Make the standard of life in prison equal to the the standard of life of the country's poorest people. Shorter sentences will get the point across this way.

Remove speeding convictions: if you crash because of speed you are off the road for X years. If someone dies then this could be prison. If you are caught driving at a speed far in excess of the conditions then you get done for dangerous driving (not speeding) = off the road.

Remove L-plate system, make every driver take a vigorous training course before getting their licence.

Get a cost-effective contract for the roads and build them straight and wide.