Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

I hate the M50 [Warning post #222]

Options
1…1415171920…37

Comments

  • Options
    #482
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,062 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    not in my lifetime.
    I think that you may not understand the term "sustainable".


  • Options
    #483
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    just as Railways superseded canals and the car has replaced the railways largely, a new form of transport is what will ultimately replace the train and bus. As what the car has brought to Transport is personal door to door transport, then it is something along that line that will be needed, not a crowded slow uncomfortable bus. I envisage a small 6 seat (or so) automatically controlled vehicle that could be booked to pick you up at home and then pick up on route any other intending passengers going to your destination (or along the route). Private cars would then be taxed into extinction (for City use...they would still be a need in rural areas I guess). There would need to be a lot of these vehicles, but as most current vehicles sit unused all day, not as many as cars currently.


  • Options
    #484
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,260 ✭✭✭markpb


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    just as Railways superseded canals and the car has replaced the railways largely, a new form of transport is what will ultimately replace the train and bus. As what the car has brought to Transport is personal door to door transport, then it is something along that line that will be needed, not a crowded slow uncomfortable bus. I envisage a small 6 seat (or so) automatically controlled vehicle that could be booked to pick you up at home and then pick up on route any other intending passengers going to your destination (or along the route). Private cars would then be taxed into extinction (for City use...they would still be a need in rural areas I guess). There would need to be a lot of these vehicles, but as most current vehicles sit unused all day, not as many as cars currently.

    You're ignoring two really important facts. Public transport carries more people into the city centre than cars and the vast majority of those are on smelly buses. Mass transport is the only effective solution in crowded city centres. A single bus will carry far more people in the same space than the mini bus solution you're describing.


  • Options
    #485
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    markpb wrote: »
    You're ignoring two really important facts. Public transport carries more people into the city centre than cars and the vast majority of those are on smelly buses. Mass transport is the only effective solution in crowded city centres. A single bus will carry far more people in the same space than the mini bus solution you're describing.

    not from door to door it wont, and you wont get people on to buses without that feature


  • Options
    #486
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    just as Railways superseded canals and the car has replaced the railways largely, a new form of transport is what will ultimately replace the train and bus. As what the car has brought to Transport is personal door to door transport, then it is something along that line that will be needed, not a crowded slow uncomfortable bus. I envisage a small 6 seat (or so) automatically controlled vehicle that could be booked to pick you up at home and then pick up on route any other intending passengers going to your destination (or along the route). Private cars would then be taxed into extinction (for City use...they would still be a need in rural areas I guess). There would need to be a lot of these vehicles, but as most current vehicles sit unused all day, not as many as cars currently.
    savagethegoat wrote: »
    not from door to door it wont, and you wont get people on to buses without that feature

    Or else 'people' need to get off the stage, and walk a km or two at the start and end of their journey, just like loads of other people do. It will do wonders for their health and their mental abilities. We're not going to be spending public money to accomodate the notions of those who refuse to get off their arse for a few minutes.

    Irish Steve wrote: »
    I'm not convinced that the people planning PT are actually looking at the bigger picture, partly because of the issues around the very real problems of making any change within DB or BE or Irish Rail, it seems to require a year's negotiation with the unions to change a route, let alone introduce a new one, which raises the question of who is actually running these companies.
    This is utter nonsense, with no basis in reality.

    Irish Steve wrote: »
    What would be very interesting, if it could be done, which I doubt, would be to get all the users of the M50 toll on a particular day, to complete a survey of the start and end point of their journey, and the frequency of that journey, to get a more specific survey of the use of the route, rather than the guess work that seems to be the norm these days. I suspect it would reveal a lot of journeys that are completely impossible in a sensible time frame by PT at present. That might provide some options for new routes going forward.

    There is plenty of data available from the Census and existing surveys showing that large amounts of current journeys are short, less than 2km or 3km and easily capable of being walked or cycled.
    Irish Steve wrote: »
    I don't regard accountants as being business in the way of making critical decisions that influence the future direction of the company, and based on a number of very bad experiences with a number of companies across a wide spectrum of industries, for me personally, accountants are in the same league as ambulance chasing solicitors, and I despise both.


    Accountants not 'business' - really? In my experience, accountants are at the heart and in many cases, at the head of most large businesses. They are certainly at the core of many businesses - that's what 'financial controller' actually means. If you had all these bad experiences, perhaps you just weren't very good at picking or managing accountants? Surely their must have been consequences for your lack of ability here - firings etc?
    Irish Steve wrote: »
    As for Private/Public, the fundamental difference there is very simple, and the core of so many issues that we face with infrastructure in this country. If you get it wrong in the private sector, that can in the worst case destroy the company, if it doesn't, depending on the severity of the "wrong" it can mean a change of employment, with all that entails, for the person or team that got it wrong

    Get it wrong in the public sector, and there's zero risk to the organisation, and in too many cases, the person or team responsible for the mistake is more than likely to get promoted out of that department into another, with glowing references, on the basis that if they're moved, they can't do any more damage to the department they were in.
    Again, utter nonsense. In my 25 years in large and small private businesses, there were many, many cases of very large cock-ups being rewarded with promotion, transfer, bonuses etc. There were many, many examples of failed projects, all of which were dealt with quietly, out of public gaze, with the guilty being paid off or moved up to their next project. The reason why you hear more about failures in public sector than private sector is because public sector business is public - not because of any intrinsic difference between the people involved.
    Irish Steve wrote: »
    We've seen countless massive failures in the public sector (PPARS, Irish Water, HSE, Ringsend Incinerator project to name a few) and the one significant aspect of all of these failures has been than there have been no dismissals, or firings, and in some cases, the people responsible for the failures are moving up the ladder rather than down it.
    So tell us then, who specifically would you fire over the HSE?

    Micheal Martin - the political architect? Or the voters who elected him and his party? Or the Sec Gen who was faced with implemented a political stunt with no evidence base? Or Brendan Drumm who took the poison chalice of trying to put a structure around the impossible? Who do you want to fire?

    And tell us again about how 'accountable' the senior execs in Irish banks who blew up our economy have been held 'accountable' in the glorious private sector?
    Irish Steve wrote: »
    To go back to the M50, when that was first put as a line on a map, over 25 years ago, there would have been no problems at all to have allocated the necessary space around all the critical junctions to enable full speed free flow junctions, with no traffic lights, or other restrictions to the operation, but for reasons best known to the planners, we ended up with a cut price mess that had to be changed almost before it was finished, and to make things worse, those same "planners" decided to put a light rail system through the middle of the busiest junction in the country, and when they discovered that it didn't work, the land to sort it out had been developed rather than being zoned for the future road develpment, so we still have a mess that can't work properly, and now never will without astronomic cost implications to remove things that have been put in the wrong places. That's down to state employees and politicians, (some of which have been proven to have been corruptly influenced) not the private sector, and most of the public transport is also not private sector.

    I don't know much about the history, but I'd guess that, as is often the case, we didn't have piles of spare cash to spend on these things at the time - so we got a cut-price solution because it was what we could afford.

    Irish Steve wrote: »
    As an example, (and I don't like all of the way they do things, but I can't deny their success) Ryanair have gone from strength to strength in their activities over pretty much that same period of time.

    Yeah, they have been fairly successful all right. But running an airline is not like running a health service. It's just a bit different.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #487
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    RainyDay wrote: »
    Or else 'people' need to get off the stage, and walk a km or two at the start and end of their journey, just like loads of other people do. It will do wonders for their health and their mental abilities. We're not going to be spending public money to accomodate the notions of those who refuse to get off their arse for a few minutes.



    .

    where did I say that Public Money was involved? Pay per use should be quite feasible, car drivers are quite used to paying their own way and contributing to the Public Transport of others.


  • Options
    #488
    Irish Steve
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 6,521 Mod ✭✭✭✭Irish Steve


    RainyDay wrote: »

    This is utter nonsense, with no basis in reality.


    Not according to the representative of BE that gave a presentation recently to the local councillors in relation to their plans for a new route that will come on line "at some stage in the first quarter of 2016". One of the major delays to that happening is "the negotiations to change the route boards". It will be in the public record in a couple of months when the minutes are approved.

    Shore, if it was easy, everybody would be doin it.😁



  • Options
    #489
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    where did I say that Public Money was involved? Pay per use should be quite feasible, car drivers are quite used to paying their own way and contributing to the Public Transport of others.

    Motorists have never paid their way. How much public space (street parking) is devoted to storage of private property (cars)? Let motorists start paying for capital costs of parking in residential and business areas and then you can claim to be 'paying your own way'.

    Irish Steve wrote: »
    Not according to the representative of BE that gave a presentation recently to the local councillors in relation to their plans for a new route that will come on line "at some stage in the first quarter of 2016". One of the major delays to that happening is "the negotiations to change the route boards". It will be in the public record in a couple of months when the minutes are approved.

    If the meeting involved Councillors, it is in the public domain already. So let's see the presentation, and see exactly what was said? And then let's cross-check with the Union, to see exactly what was going on. Let's see what other issues BE dragged into the negotiation that had nothing to do with the route change, so they can come out with the old 'unions holding up progress' line that some people just love to chew on.


  • Options
    #490
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    RainyDay wrote: »
    Motorists have never paid their way. How much public space (street parking) is devoted to storage of private property (cars)? Let motorists start paying for capital costs of parking in residential and business areas and then you can claim to be 'paying your own way'.




    .

    rubbish. Only a small fraction of Motor Tax and VRT is spent on the roads/mptorist and many of those "stored" cars are paying the Local Council for parking to support local services, more or less none of this money goes back to motoring services.


  • Options
    #491
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    rubbish. Only a small fraction of Motor Tax and VRT is spent on the roads/mptorist and many of those "stored" cars are paying the Local Council for parking to support local services, more or less none of this money goes back to motoring services.

    Very few people pay for parking at their own houses - only city dwellers. Residents permits are available at very modest cost, so those who do pay are paying nothing near the commercial cost of the space. Huge amounts of public space is devoted to providing free storage for private property.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #492
    mickoneill31
    Registered Users Posts: 855 ✭✭✭mickoneill31


    RainyDay wrote: »
    Very few people pay for parking at their own houses - only city dwellers. Residents permits are available at very modest cost, so those who do pay are paying nothing near the commercial cost of the space. Huge amounts of public space is devoted to providing free storage for private property.

    Lets just conveniently forget about the motor tax everybody with a car pays ever year or the over 50% of tax paid on every litre of petrol that's bought by anybody who drives anywhere. Or the toll taxes that a lot of people have to pay.
    I've no idea if the grand or two a year I pay on taxes for running my car are more than it costs the government to support it. Would you have any idea what the tax take is vs the amount spent RainyDay?

    My driveway wasn't free either. It's part of my property so I don't pay anything to park there each night. But I didn't purchase it for free (a price which was obviously taxed too).


  • Options
    #493
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    mickoneill31 wrote: »
    Lets just conveniently forget about the motor tax everybody with a car pays ever year or the over 50% of tax paid on every litre of petrol that's bought by anybody who drives anywhere. Or the toll taxes that a lot of people have to pay.
    I've no idea if the grand or two a year I pay on taxes for running my car are more than it costs the government to support it. Would you have any idea what the tax take is vs the amount spent RainyDay?

    You seem to have a basic misunderstanding of how tax works. It's not a savings account or investment account. You don't get out what you get in. Motor tax and excise duties on petrol are levied because they are convenient ways to take in tax. They are taxed because they can be taxed. The tax take has no connection with expenditure on roads. Drinkers don't get to expect that all their excise duties are spent on alcoholism treatment. Smokers don't get to expect that all their excise duties are spent on lung cancer.

    Toll 'taxes' are not taxes. They are fees charged by private companies for a service, same as petrol or tyres or car parking.
    mickoneill31 wrote: »
    My driveway wasn't free either. It's part of my property so I don't pay anything to park there each night. But I didn't purchase it for free (a price which was obviously taxed too).
    I'm not referring to driveways on private property. I'm referring to the many, many cars that we all see all the time parked on the street - public storage of private property.


  • Options
    #494
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    But the simple fact is that we all pay, through our taxes, for public transport subsidy and not all of us use it. The non-users are paying towards the users transport as well paying well to use their car.


  • Options
    #495
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,619 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    my taxes pay for social welfare service provision in kerry, and i don't use that.
    which i think shows again you're missing the point of taxes. it's not an 'i get out exactly what i put in' system.


  • Options
    #496
    plodder
    Registered Users Posts: 7,148 ✭✭✭plodder


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    just as Railways superseded canals and the car has replaced the railways largely, a new form of transport is what will ultimately replace the train and bus. As what the car has brought to Transport is personal door to door transport, then it is something along that line that will be needed, not a crowded slow uncomfortable bus. I envisage a small 6 seat (or so) automatically controlled vehicle that could be booked to pick you up at home and then pick up on route any other intending passengers going to your destination (or along the route). Private cars would then be taxed into extinction (for City use...they would still be a need in rural areas I guess). There would need to be a lot of these vehicles, but as most current vehicles sit unused all day, not as many as cars currently.
    Fully automatic is probably 20 or more years out, but add a driver and you're looking at something game changing like Uber that could be done today. Why not create a new class of taxi like this? If I'm not mistaken, it's how the Black taxis in Belfast have always worked. Technology like GPS, routing software, smartphones etc, would be what makes it super efficient.

    Just for pig iron - consider a few things you could do. The system might offer options like. Say you want to go directly from A to B, then you have to wait 20 minutes. But say, you are happy to walk 1km at either end, then you get a ride in five minutes, or a discount maybe (for being flexible). With an app you'd be able to do this in real time, trading off walking distance against pickup time.


  • Options
    #497
    Pinch Flat
    Registered Users Posts: 7,761 ✭✭✭Pinch Flat


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    my taxes pay for social welfare service provision in kerry, and i don't use that.
    which i think shows again you're missing the point of taxes. it's not an 'i get out exactly what i put in' system.

    yeah same here. I'm 44 and was last in a hospital when I was 7 to have my tonsils out. Where do I claim my rebate for this health system I've being subsidizing for over 3 decades??


  • Options
    #498
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    my taxes pay for social welfare service provision in kerry, and i don't use that.
    which i think shows again you're missing the point of taxes. it's not an 'i get out exactly what i put in' system.

    That's plain ridiculous. You do use the social welfare system wherever you live.( I never said that was how the tax system worked by the way....)

    You pay in your share and you use whatever you wish of the items it provides. If you don't chose to use a public transport facility, then they don't have to provide as much and you are effectively subsidising the users.


  • Options
    #499
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    savagethegoat wrote: »

    You pay in your share and you use whatever you wish of the items it provides. If you don't chose to use a public transport facility, then they don't have to provide as much and you are effectively subsidising the users.

    By your own definition, you pay your share, and you you use whatever you wish of the public transport system you desire - it just happens that your desire is to use zero share of the public transport system - that's your choice.

    But just to be clear - is your share actually zero? No Nightlink after a few pints, no Luas when your going to a gig in the Point, no train for the occasional business trip?


  • Options
    #500
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    RainyDay wrote: »
    By your own definition, you pay your share, and you you use whatever you wish of the public transport system you desire - it just happens that your desire is to use zero share of the public transport system - that's your choice.

    But just to be clear - is your share actually zero? No Nightlink after a few pints, no Luas when your going to a gig in the Point, no train for the occasional business trip?

    yeah we have all that in Rural Cork....


  • Options
    #501
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    yeah we have all that in Rural Cork....

    And do you have the M50 there also?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #502
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    No we don't thanks for reminding me, that's another thing Dublin commuters have that we don't and yet are paying for.


  • Options
    #503
    mickoneill31
    Registered Users Posts: 855 ✭✭✭mickoneill31


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    No we don't thanks for reminding me, that's another thing Dublin commuters have that we don't and yet are paying for.

    As a Dub, I'd like to thank you guys from the country for subsidizing us.


  • Options
    #504
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    savagethegoat wrote: »
    No we don't thanks for reminding me, that's another thing Dublin commuters have that we don't and yet are paying for.

    You might want to check out the topic of the thread so.

    And you might also want to thank us for subsiding social housing costs for the past decade or so, given that the Part V obligations are pretty-much ignored outside of the big cities.


  • Options
    #505
    reubenreuben
    Registered Users Posts: 1,061 ✭✭✭reubenreuben


    This morning when joining the M50 southbound from N3 blanchardstown, as you go up onto the overpass before you join the M50, there is a lane to the left on the bend that joins from northbound direction I think. I was passing this lane and was beeping out of it as this renault fluence driver thought they could push me out of the lane although they are supposed to give way to the right.

    What's wrong with these people? There's no need for this.


  • Options
    #506
    FalconGirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 874 ✭✭✭FalconGirl


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Building in the wrong place again!:mad:

    There should be some more housing in the city for the people who work in the city!

    This is true. We need to go high rise. Its that simple. Spacious high rise apartments close to the city centre where people can walk to work or commute via rail, luas, bus in a few mins.

    In my opinion we should have a new Dublin with high rise residential and office construction taking place out in that land to the east of the city and the port moved up the coast whilst at the same time retaining the charm of the old city (Current City centre). There is quite a bit of wasteland that could be bought by the government and used for these purposes.

    We are growing to fast and cant cope. Something drastic needs to be done.


  • Options
    #507
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    RainyDay wrote: »
    You might want to check out the topic of the thread so.

    And you might also want to thank us for subsiding social housing costs for the past decade or so, given that the Part V obligations are pretty-much ignored outside of the big cities.

    yeah that was over 500 posts ago, conversations move on.


  • Options
    #508
    _Kaiser_
    Registered Users Posts: 28,736 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    FalconGirl wrote: »
    This is true. We need to go high rise. Its that simple. Spacious high rise apartments close to the city centre where people can walk to work or commute via rail, luas, bus in a few mins.

    In my opinion we should have a new Dublin with high rise residential and office construction taking place out in that land to the east of the city and the port moved up the coast whilst at the same time retaining the charm of the old city (Current City centre). There is quite a bit of wasteland that could be bought by the government and used for these purposes.

    We are growing to fast and cant cope. Something drastic needs to be done.

    Unfortunately though - as a few posts above yours will show - as long as you have a "feckin Dubs get everything" from our country neighbours (and the TDs that represent them), this will never happen.

    We don't do long term/strategic thinking in this country. At most it's 3/4 years.. after that the Government of the day goes into full re-election mode making promises to everyone that they've no intention of keeping.

    What this means is that Dublin will continue to choke on traffic, property prices (to rent or buy) will continue to drive people further out into the surrounding counties, piss-poor driving standards and virtually zero enforcement will continue to result in accidents that bring the city to a standstill, and we'll limp along in this fashion with tinkering at the edges and increased charges (for public transport and drivers) probably indefinitely.

    In short, the Irish really are too short-sighted and immature in many ways to be let at the control of a country, but this is the country we live in.


  • Options
    #509
    savagethegoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭savagethegoat


    If you are referring to my post, that isn't what I was saying at all. I was reminding people that they have facilities that others don't and yet we pay the same tax rates. I'm not advocating an M50 for North Cork, just some people should bear in mind that we are over an hour away from the nearest motorway and there's an awful lot of Cork south if us!


  • Options
    #510
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    FalconGirl wrote: »
    This is true. We need to go high rise. Its that simple. Spacious high rise apartments close to the city centre where people can walk to work or commute via rail, luas, bus in a few mins.

    In my opinion we should have a new Dublin with high rise residential and office construction taking place out in that land to the east of the city and the port moved up the coast whilst at the same time retaining the charm of the old city (Current City centre). There is quite a bit of wasteland that could be bought by the government and used for these purposes.

    We are growing to fast and cant cope. Something drastic needs to be done.
    What's the fascination with high-rise building? Dublin city has more than enough land that is currently occupied by bungalows, derelict buildings & low rise old worthless structures (the land is still pricey) to provide all the accommodation needed, without having to go over 5 stories.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #511
    FalconGirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 874 ✭✭✭FalconGirl


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What's the fascination with high-rise building? Dublin city has more than enough land that is currently occupied by bungalows, derelict buildings & low rise old worthless structures (the land is still pricey) to provide all the accommodation needed, without having to go over 5 stories.

    To build more units close to the city centre which would hopefully make city living affordable. more affordable living leads to more disposable income to spend in the wider economy. The amount of people living at home in there mid twenties and early thirties because of the lack of decent affordable accommodation is astounding. A lot of these people commute to Dublin by car each morning clogging up the roads.

    Its not just residential high rise that's needed but also office space. Companies are queuing up to invest in Ireland, however the space is becoming hard to find. We need to be thinking a step ahead. To be honest, housing policy is dictated to benefit a few in Ireland. As another poster alluded to we are short sighted in this regard.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement